. . 4 : .
.. $3.3
.

a . 5: 2 ‘1. .1\ i1>\.-Kih .
'\ . a. :- izi? 1!. 5,5}.
2.,nnH-«Wv.l.9§sk.fitNR3,"§IK:.I1~I$JQ\‘1§‘I\!AI. :. 15.x?!
"3: 14' R.‘ )«h‘lfig :‘1 .61‘A‘vi' “i,—‘.1hv
is....5.!t|s.i gun}: . .. .. .1... 5
‘ 9...};ui pgkztxiiufilé .. .. . \.
En 35.. 3|! ..... {rotary}: ytPZ‘ln ll;iqrsu{.afirfi)\oh§n
J“: V utii’c i2 ,
\ \4)‘.\4§‘..:t!l)lrr¢b?£.
=2 tail; 1%: 51:3.
: . 2 f . ..
«v %
... «tagslei
.. 1.... Z n a . s .tivfimfidfii3innv
...x..‘: 1 .hmfil‘aiai ‘ 597: 1"
aoxxlivn 1 . $4.1fixhnfl5 ‘ flu. .
.71: t . fair. .
500.»..h‘xuusfi xx. 26...?!
.3 ‘2. ;. 7 s 7 . 2 ‘ ‘
a :3 .215; . ; . . \ . < .
.6- . .2 V . w
v . ‘ . l , 1 nl”:{ .
L. L . _ . . . _ 1‘ EN (hi! 1.
‘ .3

 

.3 L. it. .
.. Low .. .. a , .. . 3.. 3.: t
5L3 Jr. . . 1 . rieuflma 3.
. x» is. x . . 93.1.Wflnfiuurflt , wk.u,6d2.§i§dx t3.
. St?.§%1:.i 3.11rh.hfl”hPJH§.-.bzhfl.a Ella: 51.5.1: r: .l .‘\§ti,z
x «HZ-.59 £3.3i11ltaafiaaL9kE:vx 1.)) I:
. = 7'! 3:1.9Jn‘1M-l‘ alpaca-Jaw.” Ethan-i it , kn?!
(an: A la! .... . u . 3
.3:- uHBcas :1. 4.1.6 .
in: Q53 2.0m, aglt‘ua 2......
«was :5 It » :1 :5
1 ( Kg}; . x a
, hull. ,
~ . §
. , 1 a

r .1

 

i» ‘

.. 4 4 . o p .1 . ‘

. 9:97 2 1:1! 1 133‘ its! 3351’ e {W tilts-.11.

v v ‘.\Cl‘\.cfv"vnlv’ "v.’ ,3, 37 n; I Q‘; 9" .v 3 . I i7 I‘

. .5....:..:..2.M6,Jn.. ..x3..,.,...fl_.:.!nfi.3§.§§! ,nfihrsqshafiaztgihaufiiiigi? _ .. 3qu 322;: .29.. Crista 3.1!}
:5 “unrahu5atfluwa.d.u.§l cunt.=hm§.ik...25zlhflafinfiflfl.fi ‘0 zaldrgmtgzuig..fifilflhflflain ‘ alflzllasctdiu... 1.. . milsawzg; 10$?! 2.

, $1.550?!“ ,iw\):7.$:70.n«87!93 ‘10:. $3333.... [in it’ll .vx.;§.9» I"? 2%”. g“ hf. ruu‘ 8‘3! it; ..
{,.L.‘$$)O~vur’lfiiazvflyl.x:l..!..\.l 171%..4? 1:8 , ?E\§S I fit-ugh. , »
.‘Elfiufli.la¢i~‘l¢¢l&1~i§&3iil 5' ahltri 3"}...‘5! g!

I...“ algigi‘aii ...v) C stfixfi I ‘ Y}
2. Li‘iatalu . ...IIE§V~.JI3..I3 tux-:2. . y a! (.1 a
4 5"
£1.51: A)Vt|...l.l)| '
" iii‘ii’it
Inc“ v “Eng-Isvg I‘! ‘1’), i
x y 11...! §xxgi9iiaggx?

3
(KM. .wgtfti
\. ,
:

 

5&3

II‘XIJXZ .

A \ ’ h h V!
i a I .
. .. . 4 ".5 Ya?! I 3 n. .. ‘ , igfifi§;€ .l i), ..
. . :6 i I oilsili’n 157951 I) 5 I "Kiel‘tzfifi , ‘11'leA.ll\. .111 iglfi‘.in ” flu .
. ‘ a. z. guilt! a: .L g ,3: 2.1.1.015! I!“ iiigz. .u . g: (r; i‘g‘ cigar .5.
«a.:5..1‘ivo:sato§7~..)§52bl9a| l..:aa.n»lfl.u‘$: who! &:|9.Pl10.§.zxt§itvatilh , . \u I is
| (25.2 1.9..“3!v?§>il§\fv¢hs§l‘l§£&3 (SL5; .éégii‘ l, . , ‘
I.h.Jégttvllitfivif€€27.525afikpflif..l..rm\tlx5n!:\ yrs «.1 5: o ‘ ‘ . 2 11$ (KRIS!!! 2%
4:; ..\ .{vlirlerllliiiavni a! xiiigulr‘. kin... 3 mill? 5 ‘ . Vi\ g 5‘ ox .
I‘!tii‘0.as1lflb:§fi)fia\v§?l .‘Ji?!7!..ll§ vss’il‘ 33333 5&3; . . . gig It!
Asyxnfifivgxlsdfiflfli.Eilfiuuuuflbgyr u§££.¢ai $.5.§...is...§1!. 5:3; 2.1.15! my!!! tutti- .3 V , . . 223.: $5.. 253... 31.21. aging
‘14; .l ,. . . .I) I: . ‘ I ¢ . 155539., ‘ . ‘ i
y . u u givi} {13].};— (ii‘!!n‘%¥1§)fiztisz§.flh‘ 3!}2?r7: ‘ s _ A f§§15$gfiglg 12
2!: . . _
I
~

.1<.:5\

25):!1}.
Ir 2!!) Liliilt"
~iA|!?§5\ ‘§.§

z .1
5&3!
.\

: {502. .. in: > » .
i9§!_liii §cz 5th 7 71317311
9.... .... l: . :17 1.1.3.... 1. i
1.. fizz... ‘ifffiv 2. .x£.as.a32.v3.flx3v%.fiub 0.3... 25%.“? Zaiii;h§ti§... 1&3...
fifiiruazauvza 123.... .z £331.52? 2. 6113:...iiaei. l. .. 3.55% a... .3. g... .1: .333
.. nu . » | . Iv ..~ - v. .I u I
triearvasvishgéa 39.....nuuocna athnflfim .JAnanvxsntV .__. 33131 ‘ «2 34%.atsava43nq3a 2.2,... ‘ . i. .._ ‘ . . .
. .« I? :., f , 1.3:. f... . : , .“ ,;.....,. ‘ .v .71.: I. 9 531.... .
: y a ,- . -. . . \hgfi?! L
l , . I. i . . .. ~ . 3:.

x

.. . :Isprc ..

‘ - . t r .5. \; .. . .
v. .. . y .4 ‘ “A... .. . .. .. ...V
\ ,..y;?.1..‘ .7 ~.,.. I in . .... sv.‘ .. ... ...,.4 .. 7,? . C. . .‘ o x
I» I [Ill-I? ill-NE.
1'

.........

 

 

TH ESIS

 

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled

THE EFFECT OF BOTTLE CLOSURES AND LABEL INFORMATION
ON CONSUMERS' PERCEPTION OF WINE ATTRIBUTES

presented by

C LA | RE NAKAGAWA FURUTAN I

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

M.S PACKAGING

degree in

 

 

1H” 2. OW»

bEajor 590TI§II§ r t
Date III/(W <5) I? 37‘

0-7639

 

MSU

LIBRARIES
m

 

 

 

i IIIIIIIILIIIIIQIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIILIIIIII

RETURNING MATERIALS:
PIace in book drop to
remove this checkout from
your record. FINES wiII
be charged if book is
returned after the date
stamped beIow.

 

 

W7

<I

.' "19, 1f
,4
EfiéJo‘9flyf

0’

v ! .2-4

WW;

I 33095" I
{513 I) 5 mm
m I) g 2083

0311? I 291%

 

“4

 

THE EFFECT OF BOTTLE CLOSURES AND LABEL INFORMATION
ON CONSUMERS' PERCEPTION OF WINE ATTRIBUTES

BY

Claire Nakagawa Furutani

A THESIS

Subimitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE»

Department of Packaging

1982

"“ ”a r' .,;-"~ 3
K4, I. qu‘c- ;‘

ABSTRACT

THE EFFECT OF BOTTLE CLOSURES AND LABEL INFORMATION
ON CONSUMERS' PERCEPTION OF WINE ATTRIBUTES

By

Claire Nakagawa Furutani

A survey was conducted on the effect of wine bottle
closures and label information on consumer wine buying
obtained from 297 respondents in Jackson and Lansing,
Michigan. The survey revealed purchase and use patterns
related to age, income, education, sex and the College
Educated Frequent Consumers.

Frequent wine consumers consumed wine 1-6 times a
week and were college educated, therefore designated College
Educated Frequent Consumers in this study. They bought
wines for their own table use, and consumed California wines
most often, followed by Michigan wines.

College Educated Frequent Consumers preferred
capsules on wine bottles for special occasions and gifts.
They perceived capsules as enhancing the quality of wine.
Roll—on caps were acceptable to College Educated Frequent
Consumers for ordinary table use and were associated by them
as lower priced wines.

The respondents indicated that the label information
most important to them when selecting wine was the type of

wine (dry or sweet).

To my husband, Sheldon for his tolerance
and unfaltering faith,

And to my parents and sister, Charlene,
for their love and support

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Sincere appreciation is extended to my advisor,

Dr. Hugh E. Lockhart for his patient guidance and direct
assistance in all aspects of research and writing. I would
also like to thank Ms. Mary D. Zehner for her personal
guidance and technical assistance in the design of the
questionnaire and various other stages in my graduate studies
when I most needed it. Special thanks are extended to

Dr. Julian Lee for his attention and guidance.

I wish to express my heartfelt appreciation to the
packaging students: Kim Carswell, Chris Dwyer, Steve Henning,
and Dan Rapalje for volunteering their time and assistance
in the collection of the data, thus helping to make this
study a reality.

To Brian Breslin, the Director of Consumer Affairs
at Meijer, Inc., special thanks are expressed for his
permission to conduct my survey at the Lansing and Jackson
stores. I am also grateful to the store managers, Mr. James

Montgomery and Mr. Ray Knouff for their cooperation.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

, Page

LIST OF TABLES ........................................... Vi
LIST OF FIGURES .......................................... viii

INTRODUCTION ............................................ 1

Objective of the Study .............................. 3

LITERATURE REVIEW

The Package as a Marketing Tool .................... A
Closures: A Definition ............................ 5
Cork as a Wine Closure ............................. 6
Continuous Thread Screw Cap as a Wine Closure ...... 8
Roll-on Cap as a Wine Closure ...................... 8
Description of Secondary Seals ..................... IQ
Label Information .................................. 11
Surveys on Wine purchase and Consumption ........... 12
Surveys on Packaging ............................... 15

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Introduction to Methods ............................ 16
Types of Questions Used ............................ l7
Questionnaire Construction ......................... l8
Pretest ............................................ 20
Description of Closures ............................ 21
Data Collection .................................... 21
Analysis and Tabulation ............................ 26
Description of the Sample Household ................ 28
Education distribution of the respondents ..... 29
Age distribution of the respondents ........... 30
Sex distribution of the respondents ........... 30
Income distribution of the respondents ........ 31

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Purchase and Consumption Patterns

Household buyer ............................... 33
Intended use .................................. 3A
Place of purchase ............................. 35
Size of container ............................. 35
Factors influencing purchase of a new wine.... 37
Origin of wine ................................ 37
Frequency of wine consumption ................. 39

iv

Page

Type of wine consumed ................... 39
Type of table wines most consumed ....... AO
Summary of discussion of results for
purchase and consumption patterns.... A1
Closure Comparisons
Closure properties ...................... A3
Purpose for purchase .................... A5
Closure would not buy ................... A7
Container with cork ..................... A8
Closures perceived to have corks versus
properties of closures ............... A8
Closures perceived to have corks versus
purpose for purchase ................. A9
Price expected .......................... 50
Closure perceived to have a cork versus
price expected ....................... 51
Cork versus screw caps .................. 52
Preference for corks or screw caps ...... 52
Important Label Information...... ...... . ..... 5A
Comments written in by respondents ...... 57
RECOMMENDATIONS ................................... 58
FURTHER INVESTIGATIONS ............................ 6O
APPENDICES
Appendix I The Questionnaire ................ 63
Appendix II Tables 10-21 .................... 68
BIBLIOGRAPHY ...................................... 101

Table

(DNChU‘I—IEU.)

10
ll
l2
13
1A
15

l6
17
18

19

LIST OF TABLES
Page

Education distribution of the respondents for wine

package survey sample and Michigan sample...... 29
Age distribution of respondents for wine package

survey sample and Michigan sample .............. 30
Sex distribution of respondents for wine package

survey sample and Michigan sample .............. 31
Income distribution of the respondents for wine

package survey sample and Michigan sample ...... 32
Closures perceived to have corks, related to the

properties of the closures ..................... 49
Closures perceived to have a cork, related to the

purpose for buying the wine container .......... 50
Actual retail price and the price expected of the

container ...................................... 51
Container perceived to have a cork vs. price

expected ....................................... 52
Total respondents by label characteristics in

percent rating of "extremely important" and

"not important at all" and average weighted

scores ......................................... 55
Total respondents by purchase, cOnsumption patterns

and closure comparisons .................... ....
Age of respondents by purchase, consumption patterns

and closure comparisons ........................ 71
Income levels of respondents by purchase, consumption

patterns and closure comparisons ...............
Education levels of respondents by purchase,

consumption patterns and closure comparisons... 8“
Education levels of respondents by label

characteristics in average weighted scores ..... 86
Education levels of respondents by label

characteristics in percent.rating of "extremely

important" and "not important at all" .......... 87
Sex of the respondents by purchase, consumption

patterns and closure comparisons ............... 89
Sex of the respondents by label characteristics

in average weighted scores ..................... 92

Sex of the respondents by label characteristics in
percent rating of "extremely important" and
"not important at all" ........................ 93
College Educated Frequent Consumers and all other
respondents by purchase, consumption patterns
and Closure comparisons. ....................... 95

vi

Table Page

20 College Educated Frequent Consumers and all
others by label characteristics in average
tweighted scores ............................ 98
21 College Educated Frequent Consumers by label

characteristics in percent rating of
"extremely important" and "not important
at all" .................................... 99

vii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page
1 Plastic/cork ................................... 22
2 Roll-on...; .................................... 22
3 Foil/roll-on ................................... 23
A Lead/cork ...................................... 23
5 Data collection at Meijer ...................... 27

viii

INTRODUCTION

United States sales of table wine grew at a rate
of 9.6% per year between 1960 and 1970, increasing to 10%
between 1970 and 1975, and to l2.A% per year during the
past three years (10). The Michigan wine industry, on the
other hand, has been suffering a decline in sales over the
past five years.

At one time, Michigan wines constituted 50% of the
state's wine market, according to Dr. G.S. Howell (9),
viticulturist, Michigan State University. Howell further
explains that in the past five years, this percentage has
dropped to 10%. Although Michigan's wine consumption has
tripled, sales of Michigan's wines decreased from 2.6
million gallons in 1970 to less than 1 million gallons in
1978 (9). One of the reasons for this decrease was probably
due to protection given by the 16A tax law. Under this law,
Michigan wines are taxed $0.0A per gallon, while out—of-
state wines are taxed $0.50 (9,17). The tax advantage of
$0.A6 gave Michigan wineries little incentive to improve.
In addition, large California wineries were able to produce
wines more economically than smaller Michigan wineries.
These larger companies could compete successfully, despite
the $0.A6 tax difference.

Another problem which Michigan wineries face is the

negative image that some wine drinkers associate with a
l

2
"foxiness"(sweet character) :flavor inherent in the 'Labrusca'
grapes used in the early 1970's, adds Howell (9).

Competition from California—based companies along
with imports has been suggested to be one of the causes
of the decline in sales of Michigan wines. U.S. wine
makers totaled an estimated one billion gallons in sales,
with California wines accounting for about 7A%. Most of
Michigan's wine companies' total gallonage however, declined
by an average of 5A.2% between 1976-1979 (average of six
wine companies in existence during that period) (17).

In view of declining sales, there is a need to boost
wine sales. "The key to increased wine sales... is increased
consumer awareness (1)." Consumer input is a valuable
source of information for finding a means of increasing
the sales of Michigan wines. According to Impact, (10)
"having no reputation for producing good table wines and
no consumer base to build on, any company faces a difficult
task in becoming a viable factor in the industry. The day
is fast approaching in this industry, when those who have
not built a consumer franchise cannot survive. Importantly,
the consumer franchise is built on an image of quality
associated with its brands."

In response to the competition, Michigan wineries
replanted their vineyards with new, high quality European
grapes during the last decade (9). However, having a
quality product does not necessarily market the product.

In addition, a marketing strategy must be developed. The

consumerS'preferences and purchase patterns should be

 

explored in order to increase sales of Michigan wines. A

profile of the characteristics of the wine buyer must be

developed to focus marketing efforts on the target market.
In addition, the package has been effective in

point-of—purchase, impulse sales, as an advertising

medium and a source of information (8). Thus, a study

of consumers' purchase patterns, their attitudes towards

closures and what label information they require in order

to make the best selection for their tastes, should provide

valuable information to the wine industry in Michigan.

Objectives of the Study
The objectives of this study were as follows:

1. To survey consumers' purchase and consumption
patterns

2. To investigate consumers' attitudes toward
corks with capsules and screw caps with or
without capsules and their influence on
purchases

3. To obtain consumer opinions about what label
information is important in wine selection

These objectives were formulated with the help of
the literature review and top executives from three major
Michigan wineries. Mr. David Braganini, president of St.
Julian Wine 00., Inc.; Mr. James Warner, president of Warner
Vineyards, Inc.; and Mr. Robert Wozniak, president of Bronte
Champagne & Wines Co. were consulted on numerous occasions
to obtain their opinions about the most important factors

in wine marketing, with respect to the package.

LITERATURE REVIEW

The Package as a Marketing Tool

The wine package as we see it today is the result
of a long history and many changes. Wines, cheese and other
subsistence items were carried in animal skins by nomads.

Packaging has come a long way, since its primary
function to contain, carry and dispense. According to
Hanlon, (8) with the advancement of technology, an increase
in competition in the retail market and an increase in
consumer awareness, there became a need to preserve,
measure, communicate and to display. We are now in an era
in which the package has expanded from a functional container
to a means to motivate, promote, glamorize and to build up
or even disguise the contents.

Hanlon further explains that dispensing, along with
the requirements of carrying and containing, is an important
function of the package. In most cases, the product will
not be consumed immediately. Therefore, it must be
protected and preserved from the environment for an extended
period of time.

Communication with the consumer in the form of
instruction, warning, guarantees and specification has
now become one of the prime functions of the package.
Trademarks on packages have been useful in promoting sales

to consumers, and by guaranteeing consistent quality, they
A

 

5
have been the means of developing brand loyalty among
purchasers. Exposure of the message on the package is
an effective form of advertising, thereby taking advantage
of the display value of the package as an important means
to attract attention. At the point of sale, the package
and its message play an important role in helping the
purchaser decide whether a need exists, whether the contents
of the package will satisfy that need and which of a
variety of sizes or brands will best serve the purpose.
Thus, Hanlon states that the package becomes a potent
force in motivating consumers to make a purchase and to
promote the sale of one brand rather than another.

Hanlon adds that the effect of the package on
sales has assumed very significant proportions, with
changes in methods of merchandising and an increasing
amount of self-selection. This has given the manufac-
turer and the dealer an opportunity to enhance and
glamorize the product through the medium of the package.
Exotic closures can be used to create an illusion of
something very precious. Sanitary closures usually
communicate the nature of the cleanliness they impart.
Pilferproof closures are usually identifiable and also

communicate the desireability of the function.

Closures: A Definition

 

According to the Glossary of Packaging Terms, (6)
a closure is:
l. "A sealing or covering device on a container

for the purpose of retaining the contents and
preventing contamination thereof

6

2. The joint or seal made in attaching two parts
such as the cover of a can to the body"

The closure is an important component of the

package, since without an effective closure, the product

will not be protected against contamination and would not

be in saleable condition (3).
The ideal seal must meet the following requirements:(l5l
-Perfect sealing properties such as not admitting air
-Must be able to withstand temperature variation
-Must taste neutral
—Should be relatively easy to remove

-Lend itself to reusage when part of the contents
has been consumed

In addition to its functional qualities, a closure
can sometimes enhance the appearance of the package(8).
Closures may mean the difference between success and
failure in the marketplace. Message and brand identi-
fication, which are most likely to be noticed on the closure,
can be included in the design(50- A number of different
closures are used in bottling wine. Four of these are

listed and described in the following sections.

Cork as a Wine Closure

 

The use of cork as a stopper material dates back
to the middle 1500's and even earlier, according to
HanlonI8)- The stoppers were tapered corks and when
champagne was invented in the 1660's, they were tied in

place with string. The bark of the cork oak (Quercus suber)

 

from Spain and Portugal is still used today for wine

 

7
bottles, although plastic stoppers are gaining in popularity.
When the cork tree is at least 12 years old, the first
stripping of the bark takes place. The tree is not stripped
again until nine years later. Cork suitable for wine
stoppers is not obtained until the third harvest. After
being air dried, the cork is taken to the factory to be
boiled, to destroy insects and molds and to shrink the
pores. After a rinsing and bleaching process, the cork
is sorted for quality.

Some of the advantages of cork are as follows: (16)

1. Effective insulating medium against temperature

I\)

Impervious to liquids

3 Free of toxic ingredients

A .Does not impart odor or taste

5. Does not cause deterioration of wine

6 Effective in keeping glass bottles free from
impurities and preventing bacteria from
getting into the wine

The disadvantages are as follows:_

1. Bad or imperfect cork can cause disagreeable
odor and flavors

2. Corked bottle must be stored on its side to
keep the cork wet in order to prevent crumbling
(this is a problem in supermarkets)

3. Substantial increase in price due to higher
labor costs

A. Exposure to increases in temperature and
expansion,which causes the cork to shift
upward in the bottle thus, causes eventual,
slow leakage or weeping

8

Continuous_Thread Screw Caps
as a Wine Closure

 

 

Metal screw caps are commonly made of steel or
aluminum, often fitted with an inner liner. The threads
are formed on the cap prior to the closure operation.

The cap is threaded for ease of opening and resealing.
A tight seal depends on the resiliency of the inner liner

and the amount of torque with which it is applied.

Roll-on Cap as a Wine Closure

 

The roll-on cap is an aluminum, pilferproof screw
cap. It differs from the continuous thread closure in
that "the blank shells are rolled against the threads of
the container neck under pressure in the closure operation
according to Hanlon(8). Therefore, the thread of the
individual container tailors the thread of the closure
to a close fit.

The container finish and cap skirt are extra
deep (3). " The bottom of the outer cap shells is curled
under a protruding edge on the neck finish giving a tight
grip along a break line perforated in the cap above the
skirt rim. When twisted, the cap comes off, leaving
a portion of its skirt on the bottle." Since the cap
is threaded, it can be used for easy resealing.

The roll-on cap has been shown to retain the
freshness and flavor of wines in taste tests. A number
of taste panels in Germany and Australia conducted on
aluminum closures and cork have concluded that wines

capped with the aluminum roll-on closures have retained

 

9
their freshness far better than corked samples, according
to Rubin.CLA). In Australia, Dr. Bryce Rankine, representing
the Australian Wine Institute, tested wines stored for
6, l3 and 18 months. The results were that the Stelvin
cap (metal closure similar to the roll-on closure) retained
freshness far better than cork samples. In Germany,
identical wines were sealed with cork and roll-on closures.
After a two year period, both wines were taste tested
by an experienced tasting panel who was blind folded.
In three out of four tests, the panel unanimously preferred
wine sealed with the roll-on cap.

Rubin further reports that in 1978, the Research
Institution for the Viniculture Fruit Growing and Horticulture
in Gersenheim, Germany completed a twelve year study.

The bottles were sealed with a roll-on aluminum cap and
a shrink plastic which held the closure tightly in place.
The cork finished sample was "still a sound wine, but

the other was so very fresh and fruity, it appeared

to be newly bottledilu)."

The advantages of the roll-on and continuous
thread closures are given by Rubin and Zurn (l5, 21).

1. Improvement of the quality through air and
gas tight closures

No taste of the cork
No cork crumblings
No molding

No cork moth

Chm-Emu)

No oxidation

 

 

lO

7. Opens easily without tools (cork screw)
8. No problems with reclosing bottle

9. Upright storage does not decrease the
quality of wine

10. Relatively inexpensive; about half the cost
of a good cork

11. In good supply

Description of Secondary Seals

 

Secondary seals are a deterrent to pilferage as
well as a selling device. Some of the secondary seals are-
certainly pilferproof; however, these appear to be a
decoration more than a deterrent, or equal in both functions.
Historically, the secondary seals were primarily used as
a decoratiOn over a roll-on cap or cork on a wine bottle.

Supplementary seals, such as foil capsules, vinyl
stretch bands, vinyl shrink bands, and lead capsules are
often applied to wine bottles over either a cork stopper
or a roll-on cap. Capsules are supplementary seals formed
into a tube to slip over the cap and neck of the bottle.
The term "capsule" is also used by the wine industry to
mean supplementary seals.

The vinyl stretch band is a tube of oriented (heat
shinkable) polyvinyl chloride made to slip over the cap
and neck of the bottle, as described by Hanlon (8). The
bottles are passed through a heat tunnel and the band is

shrunk to form a tamperproof seal.

 

 

 

11
Label Information

A label is "any legend, descriptive matter or
design... an artistic and intellectual production, or
a display of written or graphic matter, as defined by
Coles (A). It included brand names, pictures, designs and
any other legal material the producers care to use.

Coles further states that labels, like the rest
of the package, can be effective in advertising, providing
information and communicating. In terms of advertising,
labels are useful as a selling device for manufacturers
and/or distributors. They provide an affordable and
convenient means for identifying products to prospective
buyers. Brand names and addresses of the manufacturer
or distributor must be placed on labelsr

Secondly, labels are a means of‘conveying infor-
mation to prospective buyers, providing that the sellers
want them to have the information. Labels are especially
important to manufacturers and wholesalers who do not
have direct contact with the consumers of their products.
Salespersons are not always familiar with the goods sold
and cannot be depended upon to convey the correct information
to consumers. According to Coles, the majority of
consumers always or usually read labels, or at least say
they do. However, there is a wide difference between
consumers who read labels casually to determine brand and
those who read them carefully knowing what information

to look for.

 

12

In conducting studies on consumers' information
concerning labels, it is easy to "slant" results by suggesting
information to consumers they may easily check, warns Coles.
It is difficult to determine whether the higher rating given
to the points suggested, do mean actual practices.

Coles reports that in a study conducted by the
Grocery Manufacturers of America, brands and information
concerning quantity are the two points consumers most frequently
look for on labels. According to Coles, in a 19Al report to
the National Canners Association by Elmo Roper, 35% of the
respondents said they look for the brand name in selecting
a product. In the Grocery Manufacturers study, 91% of the
respondents said they look for brand names. In an unpublished
thesis done in 1933 by Julia Amburgey,(A) results show that

brand names were also frequently sought.

Surveys on Wine Purchase and Consumption

 

There has been very little published data available
dealing with wine consumption in the U.S. One study done
for the U.S. government by Fowell and Baritelle (5) in
1975—1976 surveyed a panel of 7000 households who reported
their monthly wine purchases for a year. In the study, a
survey was taken of consumers' attitudes, factors leading to
wine purchases and influences on the use of wine products.
According to the results of their study, about one-half of
the U.S. households never buy wine, and less than 5% purchase

more than one—half of the wine.

 

13

In general, respondents purchasing the largest volume
of wine tended "to be further along in their life cycles,
had smaller families, more education and higher incomes."
Females accounted for 60% of all wine purchasers.

Fowell and Baritelle reported correlations between
wine types and demographic variables. Table wine purchasers
had more education, fewer household members and higher
household incomes than those who bought other types of wine.
Dessert wine purchasers were slightly less educated, had
smaller household incomes, larger families and tended to be
female household purchasers. Households purchasing sparkling
wine were slightly younger and more affluent than table wine
or dessert wine purchasers. The highest price paid was for
domestic white table wines, followed by red table wines.

Everyday usage was the dominant use of all wine types,
except for sparkling wines, used primarily for special occasions.
Dessert wines were mostly purchased for everyday use, cooking
and as gifts. More than half of the people surveyed purchased
their wines at supermarkets, followed by liquor stores, drug
stores, and others, respectively.

Households surveyed drank the same amount of wine
as the previous year. Those who bought less wine than the
previous year were further along in their life cycle or
extremely young. These households tended to have low
education levels and low household incomes.

There was some degree of brand preference for all
types of wine reported by Fowell and Baritelle. However,

the panel of households did not show strong brand preference

 

1A
for all wines produced by a single company.

In making decisions about what wine to buy, brand
name was listed as most important by almost all households.
Advice of friends or relatives was the second most important
factor in deciding what wine to buy. Price was the third
most important factor, and label was fourth.

Another study was conducted in 1967 and 1972 by a
"leading mass circulation magazine" on buying habits and
usage of alcoholic beverages, as reported by Al Karteu, (11)
general sales manager of Arkay Packaging Corporation. The
survey revealed strong increases in the number of women who
purchase and use alcoholic beverages for cooking and
special occasions. The survey also reported a strong increase
in the number of women who select a brand on impulse, favorable
attitudes towards booklets, recipes, displays and wrapping.
It reported an increase in women who enjoyed browsing in
liquor stores and an increase in the selection of a brand of
liquor on impulse.

Karteu further reports that instead of a special
planned trip to the liquor store, women are buying liquor
either before or after regular grocery purchases. This
increases the number of brand selections made on impulse and
heightens the importance of effective, attractive packaging.

The magazine survey reported that women shoppers
were most influenced by the "owner or clerk," the product,
package and display. Women are more dependent than men on
answers from retailers and the package and less tied to

specific brands. Attractive packages, new items and unusual

 

15

displays draw more attention from women than men.

Surveys on Packaging

 

Literature on consumers' attitudes and preference
for closures, closure properties and label information is
limited. Guss (7) reported on a survey that was conducted
by the National Family Opinion, Inc., in 1960. Consumers
responding requested "less advertising and more information
of the kind that accurately describes the contents or gives
specific directions for use." Guss further reports that
consumers are willing to trade some extra funds for convenience

in opening, reclosure and storage.

 

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Introduction to Methods

 

The objective of this study was to obtain
information on the influence of wine packaging on
consumers. In order to decide how best to make this
determination, an extensive review of possible methods
was made.

There are five methods for measuring consumer
attitudes and purchase patterns. These are: (12,13)

1. Interviews(face-to-face)

2: Observations

Telephone interviews

Mail questionnaire

U1~I:'UO

Personal contact questionnaire (given
personally, rather than through the mail)

The personal contact questionnaire was selected
as a measuring tool because it has the following
advantages: (12,13)

1. Able to collect large amounts of information,
inexpensively

2. Able to collect large sample size in a short
period of time

3. Ease of completion by participant
A. Limits bias if well worded

5. Ease of tabulation

l6

 

17
However, as in all methods of measurement, the
questionnaire has its limitations. These are: (12,13)

1. Increases the chances of misinterpretation,
if not well worded

2. Must be short and easy for respondents to
complete

3. Refusal to cooperate, due to lack of time
or interest

A. May not obtain a random sample
These limitations were considered and minimized as much
as possible, in the process of designing and conducting

the survey.

Types of Questions Used

 

Four types of questions were used: dichotomous,
5-point rating, check list and open ended questions.

Dichotomous questions present opposite alternatives
allowing for a third response, "don't know." Answers
were aligned horizontally on the questionnaire for ease
of consumer response and decrease bias.

Five-point rating questions were used, with 0=
not important at all and 5= extremely important. These
were used when the issue could not be responded to
accurately with dichotomous questions. The answers were
aligned vertically on the questionnaire for ease of
answering.

CheckliSt types of multiple choice questions were
also utilized. These consisted of a problem or question
followed by a list of possible answers. They served as

a reminder for respondents who might otherwise

l8
fail to give a certain reply because they might not happen
to think of it at the moment.

Respondents were instructed to check those that

applied for checklist questions. .They were to circle one
answer for 5-rating questions. Respondents were given the
choice of listing other options as responses to the questions
when appropriate.

Open—ended questions were included to allow for
opinions, questions and comments that participants

may have wanted to communicate.

Questionnaire Construction

 

The process of constructing this questionnaire
commenced with a meeting with the presidents of Bronte,
St. Julian and Warners wine companies(1, 20, 22). A
question of importance to all three companies was the
significance of any differences between cork or screw
closures used on low and moderate priced wines. In addition,
the wine companies were interested in determining what
information consumers needed on labels to make their
selection of wine, and the image conveyed by the label.

The questionnaire was constructed to satisfy
the three objectives, as stated in the introduction:

1. To survey consumers' purchase and consumption
patterns

2. To investigate consumers' attitudes toward
various types of closures and their influence
on purchases

3. To obtain consumer opinions about what label
information is important in wine selection

19

Objective 1 is accomplished with questions 1-8
of the questionnaire. In order for the informant to
participate, he or she must have consumed wine or
received wine as a gift in the last year. (We surveyed
only wine drinkers, probably the 50% of households that
Fowell and Baritelle reported to be wine buyers. This
assumption was not tested.) Questions 2—5 were designed
to determine who buys wine, for what occasion, at what
location and in what size container. Question 6 was
designed to determine where consumers seek the information
they use in making their selection of wine. Question 7
asks what state or country produced the wines purchased.
Question 8 determines the frequency of consumption.

Objective 2 addressed the question of the effect
of corks and screw caps on consumers' selection of wines.
The purpose of question 10 was to determine whether the
consumers View capsules with screw caps and/0r corks
as being pilferproof, sanitary, easy to open and reclose.
The purpose of questions 11 and 12 was to determine for
what occasion consumers would purchase four different
types of closures. These closures represented four
configurations of cork, screw cap and capsule. In
question 13, an attempt was made to ascertain whether or
not consumers could tell if the four closures included
corks. Question 1A was constructed to answer the question
of what price range consumers expected a cork to be within.

Questions 13—18 related to consumers' perception of the

20
functionality of dispensing to the environment of the four
closures. The purpose was to survey consumers' attitudes
in regard to the dispensing and the ability of cork or
screw caps to keep flavors of wine. These questions also
attempted to determine whether consumers would knowingly
purchase screw caps or corks when selecting a wine.

The purpose of question 19 was to answer the
third objective of what label information consumers need
in order to make the best selection of wine for their
taste, utilizing the 5—point rating scale.

Demographic variables are covered by questions 20—25.
Included are household size, sex, age, education, and family
income. A section on comments was included to ascertain
other information and/or questions consumers may have

had about wines and wine buying.

Pretest

Pretests were conducted prior to the actual survey
to evaluate the overall reliability and validity of the
completed questionnaire.

Initially, a group of 10 students and faculty
were asked to complete the questionnaire. The four bottle/
closure combinations were analyzed by pretesters for
suggestions and improvements.

The second pretest consisted of students and
faculty from the M.S.U. Computer Center who were familiar
with tabulation of questionnaire data. The same procedure

was followed as was used for the initial group of 10.

 

 

21
The suggestions from both pretests were utilized in
the revision and planning of the questionnaire that was

used in this study.

Description of Closures

 

Four types of closures most common in table wines
were selected for the display. These closures were:

1. Cork stopper with secondary closure (capsule
of polyvinyl chloride shrink band) labeled R

2. Roll—on pilferproof cap without cork, no capsule,
labeled T

3. Roll—on pilferproof cap with aluminum foil
capsule, labeled M

A. Cork stopper with lead foil capsule, labeled L
See Figures l—A for the appearance of the closures. Bottles
used were from Michigan retail stores. Price information
was not given. The retail price for each was l= $3.50,
2: $2.00, 3= $3.00, and A: $8.00.

Letters, instead of numbers were used to label

the closures to reduce bias.

Data Collection

The data collection took place at two Meijer
Thrifty Acre stores, "hypermarket" types of retail chain
stores which are a combination supermarket and department
stores. (See Figure 5) Meijer has a wine department located
within the stores as well as franchised party stores.

Obtaining a representative sample of Michigan wine
drinkers was a problem. It was intended that the survey

be conducted at a large shopping mall. However, the malls

 

22

 

 

 

xpoo\©moq : opdwflm

   

conHHoe\Heoa m «names

23

 

 

2A

contacted in the central and southeastern Michigan areas
had a policy against allowing surveys to be conducted
at their locations. Meijer was chosen because of the
large number of people who shop there, and the willingness
of the Meijer management to allow the survey be done in
their stores.

Two Meijer stores, one in Jackson and one in
Lansing, were chosen, as they seemed to represent the
best option within the time and cost restraints. Jackson
was selected for the greater part of the study, because that
city was judged more typical. It is not a college community
and there aren't any other special influences that could
be discerned. In Lansing, the South Pennsylvania Avenue
store was used as a back-up, in order to obtain a reasonable
quantity of responses. The Pennsylvania Avenue store was
selected over the Okemos and Saginaw stores, because it
offered the likelihood of less biased sample, less directly
influenced by higher income or college community areas.
The number of surveys obtained in the two locations were:
Jackson, 219 and Lansing, 78, for a total of 297.

The surveys were conducted on October 22 and 23,
1981. The days of the week selected were Thursday evening,
from 7-10 p.m. in the Lansing store, to include the working
sector of the population, and Friday, from 10 a.m. to 6 p.m.
in the Jackson store, to survey housewives, the elderly
and retired, and working people. To insure the greatest

volume of people who would be shopping on those days,

25

the dates were selected with consideration to major
social events taking place, in order to avoid competing

activities that might reduce or bias the sample.

On Thursday evening, in the Lansing store, three
volunteers assisted in the collection of data. Two were
involved in the solicitation of prospective participants.
The third answered questions participants may have had
and reviewed completed questionnaires. One table and
six chairs were provided by the staff at Meijer.

These were set up near the south entrance of the store,
with a poster board to inform and solicit prospective
participants. Another smaller poster, was set up at the
north entrance to inform shoppers of the survey location.

At the Jackson location, four volunteers were
utilized. Since this store was larger than the Lansing
store, two tables were set up with four chairs per table.
One table was set up at each of the two entrances, using
the same posters for publicity. One table was located
adjacent to the liquor store, and the other station was
near the bank and beauty salon. Both were located near
the check—out areas.

Four bottles were displayed on each table at
both stores. Each bottle was covered with a white sheet
of paper extending up to three—fourths the height of the
bottle and fully wrapped around the bottle in order to
eliminate the influence of bottle shape. Labels were removed

to eliminate bias due to brands. Brand names did not

 

 

26

appear on the closures. See Figure 5.

In order to participate in the survey, prospective
participants must have been 21 years and older. (This
is the legal drinking age in the state of Michigan at
the time of this study.) Only one person per household
was allowed to participate. The participants were
advised not to discuss the questions with one another.
They were assured that there was no right answer, and
that we simply requested their opinions. The prospective
participants must have purchased wine or received it as
a gift within the last year. This condition purposely
biased the sample in favor of wine consumers; and according
to results published by Fowell and Baritelle, probably
eliminated 50% of the representative populations from our
sample. This presumption was not tested.

As an incentive for participation and in appreciation
for their assistance, participants were given a free cork

screw provided all questions were answered.

Analysis and Tabulation

 

The survey was tabulated and edited for thorough-
ness, consistency and reliability. A Chi square test was
conducted at the 5% level. The Chi square test is a
statistical test which measures as probability, frequency
differences between sample populations.

The following characteristics of the family were
cross tabulated with the responses: family income,

education level, age and sex. Other cross tabulations

 

27

 

Figure 5 Data Collection at Meijer

28
were as follows: price expected by properties of closures,
price expected by closures perceived to have a cork,
properties of closures by closures perceived to have a cork
and purposes of wine purchases by closures perceived to
have a cork. The comparison of price expected with closure
properties and perception of closures to have corks was
to determine if price was perceived to be related to these
characteristics in wine buying decisions. The responses
on closures perceived to have a cork and purpose for
wine purchases were influenced by the knowledge that the
closure included a cork.

The selection of the some college and college
graduates in the cross tabulation was based on the results
of this study. The results revealed that A8% (3A) of the
71 college graduates and 36% (AA) of the 122 some college
educated respondents consumed wine 1—6 times a week.

Since these 78 respondents make up A0% of the 193 college
educated respondents, they were chosen to represent the
frequent wine consumers and will be designated as the
College Educated Frequent Consumers in this thesis.

These frequent wine consumers will be the target in our
recommendations and in further study. The 219 other
respondents represented all the other respondents, regard—
less of education levels or frequency of consumption,

excluding the College Educated Frequent Consumers.

Description of the Sample Household
Data describing the respondents and their families

were tabulated to provide a profile of the total sample

29

surveyed. This profile serves as a basis for comparison with
the Michigan sample compiled by the U.S. Census Bureau.
The characteristics of family income, education levels, age

and sex will be compared and discussed.

Education distribution of the respondents

Table 1 indicates the percentages of households in
various education groups for the sample obtained in our
survey, as compared to the U.S. census data for Michigan.

The table shows that considerably fewer families in
our sample had less than high school education, as compared
to the U.S. census data sample for Michigan; and more families
were in the some college and college educated or beyond groups.
This difference can probably be attributed to the fact that
our sample was based on wine drinkers only. This explanation
is based on Fowell and Baritelle's (6) findings that wine
purchasing households had some college education, while the
nonpurehasing households had less education.

TABLE l—- Education distribution of the respondents_for Wine
package survey sample and Michigan sample.

 

 

 

 

 

Education Sample Michigan sample1
Percent

Some high school 3.7 36.0
Completed high school 2A.0 3A.0
Technical school 6.0 ———-

Some college Al.0 15.0
College and beyond 2A.0 15.0
.No.answer 0.7 -—--

No. in sample 297 222A

1

SOURCE: U.S. Dept. of Commerce. Bureau of the
Census. Current Population Reports, Consumer Income Series, 1980.
111: 97.

30

Age distribution of the respondents

 

Table 2 shows the age distribution of the respondents
from the survey taken as compared to the U.S. data for
Michigan.

A larger proportion of the respondents in this survey
was between the ages 26—35 than in the Michigan sample;
and fewer were in the 56 and above age group. These diff—
ences may be due to a higher percentage of wine drinkers in
the 26—35 age group, and also, the collection of data at a
"hypermarket" which may have caused the under-representation
of the 56 and above age group. Older shoppers may not shop
at large supermarkets as frequently as would younger patrons.

Table 2—-Age distribution of respondents for wine package
Survey sample and Michigan sample.

 

 

 

 

 

Age Sample Michigan sample1
Percent

Under 26 18.0 1A.5

26-35 38.0 25.0

36-A5 19.0 17.0

A6-55 12.0 15.0

Over 55 12.0 29.0

No. in sample 297 6,1AA,925

1

SOURCE: U.S. Dept. of Commerce. Bureau of the Census.
1980 Census of Population. pp. A—5.

 

Sex distribution of the respondents

 

A comparison of our sample and the U.S. census data
for sex in Michigan is shown in Table 3. It indicates an
over-representation of females and an under-representation

of males. This over-representation of females is probably

31

because women generally are the food shoppers. Fowell and
Baritelle (6) indicated that women make up 60% of all wine
purchases. The sex bias of the respondents may not affect
the results, since according to this survey, the wine buying
is largely shared between male and female householders.

Table 3--Sex distribution of respondents for wine package
survey sample and Michigan sample.

 

 

 

 

 

Sex Sample Michigan sampleI
Percent
Males 39.0 A9.0
Females 60.0 51.0
No answer 1.0 ---
No. in sample 297 9,258,3AA
1

SOURCE: U.S. Dept. of Commerce. Bureau of the Census.
1980 Census of Population. pp. A-5.

Income distribution of the respondents

A comparison of our sample and the U.S. census data
for household incomes in Michigan is shown in Table A.

An over-representation is shown in income levels
above $15,000 and an under—representation occurred in income
levels below $15,000. Thisnmy be due to the bias we
built into the sample toward wine drinkers. Fowell and
Baritelle (6) reported that higher income households are the

wine purchasing households.

32

Table A.uIncome distribution of the respondents for wine
package survey sample and Michigan sample.

 

 

 

 

 

Income Sample Michigan samplel
Percent
Less than $10,000 6.A 28.0
$10,000—1A,999 12.0 17.0
$15,000—2A,999g/ 33.0 28.0
$25,000 and above A9.0 27.0
No answer 5.1 0.0
No. in sample. 297 2902
a/

— A breakdown of income levels between $25,000-35,000
was not shown by the source cited below.

1 SOURCE: U.S. Dept. of Commerce. Bureau of the

Census. Current Population Reports, Consumer Income Series.
1980. 111: 97.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The results of this survey represents responses
of the individual participant or the entire household,
whichever applied to the question. Each question is
discussed separately in the order in which it appears in
the questionnaire. The purpose of this presentation is to
discuss the noticeable trends and main points. A complete

tabulation of the results is in Appendix II.

Purchase and Consumption Patterns

 

Household buyer

 

When the respondents were asked who in the
household usually bought the wine in the last year, in
39% of the households surveyed, women reported buying the
wine. In 35%, both men and women indicated sharing in
the purchase of wine. Males were reported as the primary
wine buyer in 26% of the households.

In households with incomes of $25,000 and above,
significantly more women and men reportedly shared in the
wine buying. Females indicated buying the wine as household
income levels decreased under $25,000. In all income
levels, males were not reported as being the predominant

wine buyers in the family.

33

 

3A

Intended use

 

In response to the question of what purpose
wine was bought in the last year, 68% of the total
households reported buying wine intended for guests or
parties, followed by ordinary use (56%), and special
occasion (52%). Wines were reported as being bought as
a gift (26%), and for cooking (18%). Other written in
responses by less than 2% of the respondents each included:
business, religious reasons, pleasure/no special occasion.

Over 60% of the households with income levels
over $25,000 indicated purchasing wines for ordinary use
in the last year, shown to be a significant difference.
Over 70% of them indicated buying wines for guests and for
parties. In addition, wine reportedly bought for cooking,
for a special occasion or for guests/parties increased with
an increase in income levels. However, beyond $35,000,
wines reported as being bought for special occasions
decreased slightly.

There was a significant decrease in wines reported
as being bought for special occasions as respondents'
ages increased. However, respondents over 35 years reported
buying wines for ordinary use significantly more than

younger respondents.

Significantly more of the respondents who attended
or graduated from college, compared to those with less
education, reported buying wines for cooking. In fact,
the reported purchase of wines for cooking is negligible

for respondents with less than college education.

35
Significantly more (81%) of the 78 College Educated
Frequent Consumers reported buying wine for ordinary use,
more than all others (A7%) in the last year. Significantly
more (36%) of the College Educated Frequent Consumers, than

all other respondents (11%) reported buying wines for cooking.

Place of purchase

 

In response to the question of where wines were
usually bought in the last year, 71% of all households
reported buying wines at supermarkets, followed by the
liquor/party store (65%), convenience store (15%) and drug
store (3%). Other written in responses by less than
5% of the respondents included: wines bought from a
distributor, wines bought at wine tasting rooms or at a
winery and wines bought at a wine tasting party.

As the ages of the respondents increased, there
was a significant decrease in wines reported as being bought
at liquor stores and convenience stores. A11 age groups
reported buying wines at supermarkets to some degree.

Significantly more wines were reported as being
purchased at convenience stores as education levels increased.

College Educated Frequent Consumers indicated buying
wines at convenience stores, significantly more than all

other respondents.

Size of container

 

When asked what size container they usually bought
in the last year, 52% of all the respondents indicated

buying wines in liter sizes, followed by 750 m1 sizes (A8%).

36
Che—half gallon (21%), 1.5 liters (11%), and 1 gallon (9%)
sizes were not as extensively bought as were all other
sizes. Other written in responses by less than 1% of the
respondents each included: wines bought by the case,
magnum, 1/2 liters and "small samples."

Smaller sizes of wine (750 ml and 1 liter) were
reported as being purchased by all age groups to some degree.
Significantly more (20%) of the respondents A6-55 years,
than other age groups, indicated buying wines in gallon
sizes. Wines were more extensively reported as being
bought in 1/2 gallon sizes as respondents' ages increased
up to 55 years. Respondents under A6 years indicated
buying wines in smaller sizes, liter and 750 m1, more than
larger sizes.

As education levels of the respondents increased,
there was a significant increase in wines reportedly
purchased in 1 gallon sizes.

Significantly more men than women reported usually
buying wines in 750 ml sizes. Women however, indicated
usually buying wines in liter and 1/2 gallon sizes.

Significantly more of the 78 College Educated
Frequent Consumers indicated buying wines in 1/2 gallon,
and 1 gallon sizes, than did all other respondents.

In summary, the reported preference for all wine
buyers was for 750 ml or liter sizes. The large sizes,
1/2 gallon and 1 gallon were consumed most by householders

A6-55 years old, college educated and with income levels

 

37
over $25,000. In these categories, 20—30% of the households

reported buying these large sizes in the last year. Of these,

53% were the College Educated Frequent Consumers.

Factors influencing purchase of a new wine

When asked what factors would most influence respon—
dents in their selection of a new wine, friends and
relatives were rated the most influential (65%). This was
followed by brand name (A1%), label (39%) and price (27%).
Other factors influential in wine selection as reported by
the total respondents were the liquor clerk (1A%), wine guide
(11%) and advertisement (7%). Other comments written in by
less than 1% of the respondents were: "taste" and "availabi-
lity of an unmarketable wine from a distributor."

Significantly more of the $15,000-25,000 than all
other income levels, reported as being most influenced by the
wine label.

Twenty—four percent of the college graduates reported
using the liquor clerk in their new wine selection, signifi—
cantly more than respondents of other education levels.

Fifty percent of the College Educated Frequent
Consumers reported being influenced by the label in their
new wine selection. This compares with 36% of all other

respondents, shown to be a significant difference.

Origin of wine

 

In response to the question of where most of the
wines come from that respondents buy, 62% reported purchasing

California wines, followed by imported wines (A1%) and

38
Michigan wines (35%). Seventeen percent reported they
"did not pay any attention to where the wine was produced,"
11% reported purchasing wines produced in New York and 1%
in Ohio.

The reported purchase of Michigan wines increased
slightly as respondents ages increased up to 55 years,
shown to be a significant difference. Three times the
percentage of respondents A6—55 Years old indicated buying
Michigan wines as compared to respondents under 25 years.
Only 20% of the 25 years old respondents reported buying
Michigan wines. Respondents 36 years and older indicated
buying California wines more than those under 36 years.
However, 63% of the A6—55 age group indicated buying both
Michigan and California wines.

There was a significant increase in the reported
purchase of Michigan wines as respondents' household
incomes increased. Respondents with household incomes
$35,000 and over were more likely than lower incomes, to
report buying Michigan wines. Imported wines however, were
reportedly purchased in largest proportions by respondents
with household incomes under $10,000. (One might question
this result on intuitive grounds, but this is the report of
the respondents.)

Significantly more of the College Educated Frequent
Consumers reported buying California, (75%) Michigan (A6%)
and New York-produced wines (17%), compared with all other

respondents (57%, 31% and 8%, respectively).

39

Less than 2% of the respondents each wrote in
comments on where the wine was produced. Requested was more
information on the origin of wine. Comments made on Michigan
wines suggested more advertising and distribution of
Michigan wines. In addition, more information was requested
on Michigan wines and California wines versus Michigan wines.
One comment made was, "California wines are good." Another

comment made was, "German wines are superior."

Frequency of wine consumption

 

When the respondents were asked how often wine was
consumed in their household, 11% reported consuming wine
3—6 times a week; 27%, 1-2 times a week, 26%, 2—3 times a
month; 19%, every month or two; and 16%, 1—5 times a year.
Significantly more (8A%) of the at least some college
graduates reported to consume wine at least once a week.
Whereas, 6A% of the respondents with some high school

education reportedly consumed wine 1-5 times a year.

Type of wine consumed

 

When asked what type of wine respondents most
consumed in the last year, 69% of the respondents and their
household members reported consuming table wines, 1A%,
sparkling wines; and 7%, dessert wines.

Significantly more respondents reported consuming
sparkling wines than dessert wines as respondents' ages
increased. One exception was the A6-55 age group, where

87% of the 31 respondents reportedly were table wine consumers.

 

 

 

A0
Eighty—nine percent of the 78 College Educated
Frequent Consumers reported consuming table wines as
compared to an average of 70% of all other respondents,
shown to be statistically significant. All other respon—
dents reported consuming sparkling and dessert wines more

than these College Educated Frequent Consumers.

Type of table wines most often consumed

When asked to check two of the six types of table
wines listed they most often drink, 32% of all respondents
reported consuming red semi—sweet and 30%, white semi—dry
table wines. Twenty—seven percent of all respondents
indicated they most often consumed rose wines, 22%, white—dry;
and 11%, red—dry wines.

There was a significant decrease in the consumption
of red semi—sweet wines as respondents' ages increased. In
contrast, as respondents' ages increased, there was an
increase in the reported consumption of white semi-dry wines.

As income levels increased, there was a significant
decrease in the reported consumption of red semi—sweet
wines. As respondents' household income levels increased
up to $35,000, there was an increase in the reported
consumption of white semi—dry wines; and beyond $35,000, the
reported consumption of rose wines increased.

The College Educated Frequent Consumers reported
consuming white semi-dry (A9%) and white—dry wines (39%),
significantly more than did all other respondents (33% and
22%).

Al

Summary of discussion of results for purchase and consumption
patterns

In summary, wines are reportedly bought for guests/
parties, ordinary use and special occasions, more than for
cooking or as a gift. College Educated Frequent Consumers
indicated buying wines for ordinary use, more than any other
use. The reported wine usage increased with increase in
income. Respondents indicated buying wines at supermarkets
and liquor stores, more than any other retail stores; and
the 750 ml and liter sizes were reportedly bought most
frequently. The purchase of 1/2 gallon and 1 gallon sizes,
though a small percentage, is primarily by the College
Educated Frequent Consumers. Wine purchasers reported to
base their new wine selections on recommendations from
friends and relatives. They reported being influenced by
brand name and label information to a lesser extent.

College Educated Frequent Consumers reported buying most of
California wines and to a lesser extent, Michigan wines.
Respondents with income levels $35,000 and over, more than
other income levels, reported buying Michigan wines.

About 38% of the total respondents reported consuming
wine at least once a week. Seventy percent (78) of the
1-6 times a week wine consumers have some college and college
and beyond education. This’flxz has been identified as the

College Educated Frequent Consumers.

A2
Closure Comparisons

The four types of closures used in this study
are described below. This summary is for the benefit
of the reader in recalling the closures which were
described in the methods section of this thesis. These
closure systems were selected to represent four styles
for the purpose of determining consumer perception of
the <iifferent7 styles and attributes of the closures
that are described in the questions. The closures were
standard closures available in retail stores. The four
closures were:

1. Roll-on pilferproof cap without capsule,
designated roll-on, labeled T, actual
retail price=$2.00

2.‘ Roll-on-pilferproof cap with aluminum foil
capsule, designated foil/roll—on, labeled M,
actual retail price=$3.00

3. Cork with lead foil capsule, designated lead/
cork, labeled L, actual retail price=$8.00

A. Cork with plastic capsule, designated plastic/
cork, labeled R, actual retail price=$3.50

The labels and prices were removed from the wine bottles
and no other price information was provided.

Respondents were instructed to look at all four
containers of wine. They were then instruCted to circle
for each of the five questions, the appropriate container
coded letter that reflected their decision with regard
to the questions. These responses are reported in the

sections which follow.

A3

Closure properties

 

"Keeps the mouth of the bottle clean"

When the respondents were asked which container
"keeps the mouth of the bottle clean," 66% rated the
plastic/cork, while 61% selected the foil/roll—on and 52%
selected the lead/cork closure. Only 32% identified the
roll—on as a sanitary closure. In other words, almost
70% of the respondents did not think that the roll-on
closure would "keep the mouth of the bottle clean." However,
adding the capsule seems to impart the property of cleanliness,
according to the respondents' perception.

As respondents' ages increased up to 55, there was
a significant increase in the perception of the roll—on
closure as being sanitary.

Significantly more respondents in income levels
$25,000—35,000 (A7%) than all other income levels perceived

the roll-on closure as being sanitary.

"Can tell if it has been opened"

 

Sixty-five percent of all respondents attributed
to the foil/roll—on the characteristic, "can tell if it
has been opened" or sometimes called pilferproof. The
plastic/cork and lead/cork were both identified by 63%
of the 272 respondents as pilferproof. Fifty—two percent
recognized the pilferproof nature of the roll-on. In other
words, over half of the respondents did not believe the
roll-on was pilferproof. Again, the capsule appears to

have imparted this property.

 

 

AA
Significantly more of the 71 College Educated
Frequent Consumers (75%) perceived the plastic/cork to be
pilferproof more than the other closures. Fifty-eight
percent of all other respondents rated the plastic/cork

as being pilferproof.

"Easy to open"

 

The roll—on was perceived as being "easy to open"
by 90% of the total respondents. Thirty-one percent rated
the foil/roll-on as being "easy to open", 1A% rated the
plastic/cork and 13% rated the lead/cork.

Significantly more females (16%) perceived the lead/

cork as being "easy to open" than males (6%).

"Easy to reclose"

 

Eighty-five percent of the total respondents
perceived the roll—on as being "easy to reclose for storage",
followed by the foil/roll—on, by A2%; the plastic/cork, by

2A%; and the lead/cork, by 19%.

"Higher quality product"

 

The lead/cork and the foil/roll-on closures were
perceived to enclose a "higher quality product" by 52%
each of the 263 respondents. Forty-one percent of the
respondents indicated that the plastic/cork enclosed a
"higher quality product." It is interesting to note that
the foil/roll—on was perceived as being of higher quality
than the plastic/cork. Only 7% related the roll—on with a

quality product.

 

A5
Significantly more women than men perceived the foil/
roll-on as enclosing a quality product. Men however, rated

the lead/cork and plastic/cork as quality wines.

"Keeps flavor better"

 

Fifty-nine percent and 53%, respectively of all
respondents perceived the lead/cork and plastic/cork as
"keeps flavor better." An additional 38% indicated that
the foil/roll-on keeps the wine flavor better and 19%
favored the roll—on.

A significant comparison between the perception of
the foil/roll-on and respondents' incomes indicated that
the respondents with household income levels less than
$10,000 and those in the $35,000 and above levels were less
likely than the middle income levels, to perceive the
foil/roll—on as retaining wine flavor.

Significantly more females than males rated the
foil/roll—on as retaining wine flavors. Males on the
other hand, perceived the lead/cork to keep the flavor of

wine better.

Purpose for purchase

 

an:

Fifty—four percent of all respondents indicated
they would purchase the foil/roll—on and a close 53% would
buy the lead/cork on a gift wine. Forty percent indicated
they would buy the plastic/cork as a gift, and only 8%

indicated they would buy the roll-on. Note that the roll-on

A6
was reportedly preferred on a gift wine only if it had a
foil capsule over it.

Sixty—six percent of both the 25 and younger and
the 36—A5 age groups reported they would purchase the foil/
roll-on as a gift, shown to be a significant difference.
This percentage (66%) is also higher for the foil/roll-on
than in any other age group. In contrast, the 26—35 and
the A6 and older age groups indicated they would more
likely buy the lead/cork as a gift.

Respondents with some high school (82%), college
graduates (63%) and high school graduates (5A%) reported they
would purchase the lead/cork significantly more than other
closures as a gift.

Significantly more of the College Educated Frequent
Consumers (53%), than all other respondents, reported they

would buy the plastic/cork on a gift wine (36%).

Ordinary use

 

The respondents indicated they would purchase wine
with all four closures for ordinary use. The foil/roll-on
and the lead/cork would be reportedly bought for ordinary
use by A2% and Al%, respectively. Thirty—nine percent
indicated they would buy the roll-on and 38%, the plastic/cork
for ordinary use.

Significantly more males than females indicated they
would buy the foil/roll-on for ordinary use.

Significantly more of the 78 College Educated

Frequent Consumers (55%) indicated they would buy the

A7
foil/roll-on for ordinary use, as compared with 37% of all

other respondents.

Party/special occasion

 

Fifty-four percent of the respondents indicated
they would buy the lead/cork for a party/special occasion.
This was closely followed by the foil/roll—on (50%), plastic/
cork (A3%) and the roll-on (16%). As in wines purchased
as a gift, the foil/roll-on would be reportedly purchased
in nearly equal proportions to the lead/cork and more than
the plastic/cork for a party or special occasion. The roll—
on, in comparison to the foil/roll-on, generally was not
reported to be purchased for a party/special occasion.

Significantly more of the 91 respondents in the
36—55 age group indicated they would more likely buy the
plastic/cork for a party, than did the older or younger
respondents.

Respondents with income levels between $10,000-
$l5,000 and $25,000—35,000, significantly more than other
income levels, would purchase the plastic/cork for a party/
special occasion.

Significantly more of the College Educated Frequent
Consumers (60%) indicated they would buy the plastic/cork
for a party/special occasion. Whereas, only 37% of the 217
other respondents indicated they would buy the plastic/cork.
All other respondents would buy the lead/cork, more than

the other closures.

 

A8

Closure would not buy

 

Thirty—seven percent of the 280 respondents reported
they would not buy the roll—on, 10% would not buy the plastic/
cork, 7%, lead/cork; and 7%, foil/roll-on.

Significantly more of the respondents with income
levels less than $10,000 (22%) than higher income levels,

reported they would not buy the foil/roll-on and lead/cork.

Container with cork

 

Seventy-four percent of the 291 respondents perceived
the lead/cork to have a cork and 70% perceived the plastic/
cork to have a cork. In contrast, 28% perceived the foil/
roll-on to have a cork, when in fact it did not. One
percent perceived the roll—on to have a cork.

Significantly more (82%) of the 25-35 Year old
respondents than all other age groups perceived the lead/
cork to have a cork.

Significantly more of the college graduates were
less likely to perceive the foil/roll—on as having a cork
than respondents of other education levels. The 193
respondents with at least some college education perceived
the plastic/cork to have a cork more than did respondents of
other education levels.

Significantly more of the College Educated Frequent
Consumers perceived the plastic/cork and lead/cork to have

corks as compared with all other respondents.

Closures perceived to have corks versus properties of closures
Of the closures perceived to have corks, the lead/

cork received the overall highest rating in all closure

A9
properties. The highest rating for the lead/cork was for
the characteristics "keeps flavor better," "higher quality
product," and "can tell if it has been opened." A signifi-
cant relationship was shown between the 1ead/cork perceived
to have a cork and "can tell if it has been opened" and
"keeps flavor better." (See Table 5)

The plastic/cork perceived to have a cork and
"can tell if it has been opened" was shown to be a signifi-
cant difference.

Of those who perceived the foil/roll—on to have a
cork, it was most frequently thought to "keep flavor better"
and enclose a "higher quality product," shown to be a
significant difference. The foil/roll—on was also shown to
be significant for the properties of being "easy to open"

and "easy to reclose."

Table 5-— Closures perceived to have corks, related to the
properties of the closures. a/

 

 

Plastic/cork Roll-on Foil/roll-on Lead/cork

 

 

Properties n=205 n=3 n=8l n=218
Percent b/
Keeps flavor better 80.0 2.1 37.A¥v 83.1*
Higher quality 77.1 0.0 36.2* 82.0
Can tell if Opened 76.0* 0.7 2A.2 80.2*
Keeps mouth clean 72.6 1.A 2A.7 79,7
Easy to reclose 65.2 0.A 13.8* 75.0
Easy to open 51.3* 0.8 10.3* 5A.l*
a/ .
E/ Can give more than one response.

g Values are for positive response.
Chi square significant at 5% level.

Closures perceived to have a cork vs. purpose for purchase
Of the closures perceived to have a cork, 85% of

the respondents reprtedly would buy the plastic/cork as a

50
gift, 78% for special occasion, and 73% for ordinary use.
(See Table 6) Also, 79% of the respondents indicated they
would buy the lead/cork as a gift, 77% for a party and 73%
for ordinary use. Thirty-five percent of the respondents
indicated they would buy the foil/roll-on as a gift,
thinking it had a cork, 30% for special occasions, and 28%

for ordinary use.

Table 6——Closures perceived to have a cork, related to the
purpose for buying the wine container. a/

 

 

Plastic/cork Roll—on Foil/roll-on Lead/cork

 

 

Purpose n=205 n=3 n=81 n=2l8
Percent b/
Gift 8A.8* 0.0 3A.9* 78.9
Party/spec. occ. 78.3* 0.0 30.A 77.3
Ordinary use 73.1 0.0 27.5 73.1
3; Can give more than one response.‘
¥ Values are for positive response.

Chi square test significant at 5% level.

Price expected

 

When asked what price range was expected on the
containers, 78% of the total respondents indicated that
the roll—on was less than $3.00. The actual retail price
was $2.00. (See Table 7) The plastic/cork (56%), foil/
roll-on (53%) and lead/cork (52%) were all most expected to
cost $3.00—6.00. The actual retail prices were $3.00 for the
foil/roll-on, $3.50 for the plastic/cork and $8.00 for the
lead/cork. Of all the closures, the lead/cork (39%) was
most expected to cost $6.00 and above, followed by the foil/
roll-on (30%), plastic/cork (2A%) and the roll-on (2%).

Significantly more of the respondents with household

income levels $25,000-35,000, than other income levels,

51
perceived the plastic/cork to cost $6.00 and above; The
highest percentage (11%) of the respondents with household
incomes under $10,000 perceived the roll-on to cost $6.00

and above, shown to be statistically significant.

Table 7-—Actual retail price and the price expected of the
containers.

 

 

Price expected

 

 

Actual retail $2.99 and $3.00- $6.00
Closures price below $5.99 and above
Percent
Plastic/cork $3.50 15.9 55.9 23.7
Roll—on 2.00 78.0 18.0 2.0
Foil/roll—on 3.00 9.2 52.9 30.2
Lead/cork 8.00 5.A 52.2 39.0

 

N=297

 

Closures perceived to have a cork vs. price expected

 

Of the closures perceived to have a cork, the
plastic/cork, lead/cork and foil/roll-on were all expected
to be on wine costing $3.00-6.00, by nearly equal percentages.
(See Table 8) Of significance was the fact that the plastic/
cork expected to cost less than $3.00. Only 10% of the 205
respondents who perceived the plastic/cork to have a cork,
expected it to be on a wine costing less than $3.00. Thirty
percent of those who perceived the plastic/cork to be on a
wine costing $6.00 and above, expected it to have a cork,
another significant finding. Fifty-six percent of the
respondents expected the plastic/cork to be on a wine costing
$3.00—6.00, perceiving it to have a cork.

A significant comparison revealed that A2% of the
81 respondents who perceived the foil/roll—on to have a

cork, expected it to be on a wine costing $6.00 and above.

52
Forty-four percent of the 218 respondents who
perceived the lead/cork to have a cork, expected it to
be on a wine costing above $6.00, another significant
finding. However, 53% of those who perceived the lead/
cork to have a cork expected it to be on a wine costing

$3.00-6.00.

Table 8——Container perceived to have a cork vs. price
expected. a/

 

 

 

 

Price Plastic/cork Roll-on Foil/roll-on Lead/cork
expected n=205 n=3 n=81 n=2l8
Percent p/
$2.99 and below 10.2* 33.3 7.A 5.0
$3.00-5.99 56.1 33.0 50.6 52.8
$6.00 and above 30.2 0.0 A2.0* A3.6*
a/

b/ Can give more than one response.
¥ Values are for positive response.
Chi square test significant at 5% level.

Cork vs. screw caps

 

When the respondents were asked in two separate
questions, whether a screw cap or cork on a bottle or wine
is easy or hard to open, keeps flavor or does not, easy to
reclose or hard, 95% of the respondents said that the
screw cap was easy to open and 35% indicated that the cork
was easy to open. Likewise, 92% indicated that the screw
cap was easy to reclose, as opposed to 39% who reported
that the cork was easy to reclose. However, 89% indicated
that the cork keeps wine flavor, while A3% indicated that
the screw cap contains the flavor.

Significantly more women than men indicated that

screw caps keeps wine flavor.

53

Preference for corks or screw caps

 

Respondents were asked if they knew that there was
a cork on the bottle or wine, whether they would prefer,
not prefer, or not care either way to buy the wine. The
same question was asked in regard to screw caps. Thirty
percent of the respondents admitted that they preferred
corks, whereas only 17% indicated a preference for screw
caps. In contrast, 61% reported they did not care if a
wine had a screw cap, while 53% reported they did not care
if a wine had a cork. A slight preference for corks was
indicated, as a higher percentage of the respondents
reported a preference for buying wines if they knew it had
a cork. In addition, a lower percentage reported they did
not care if a wine had a cork, as compared to those who cared
if there was a screw cap on the bottle.

Significantly more of the 55 years and older respond—
ents (61%), did not care if a wine had a cork. As
respondents' ages increased, there was a decrease in the
reported preference for wines with a cork. In addition, as
respondents' ages increased, there was an increase in the
reported preference for screw caps.

Significantly more men (38%), than women (25%),
preferred corks and did not care if a wine had a screw cap.
Women however, reported a preference for screw caps.

In summary, respondents reportedly preferred screw
caps to corks, for the opening and closing functions.
However, respondents reported a preference for corks in

keeping wine flavor better than screw caps.

5A

Important Label Information

 

Respondents were asked what label information they
needed to make a choice among different wines. They were
given a list of 11 kinds of information. For each one, they
were asked to indicate the degree of importance from 0 (not
important at all) to 5 (extremely important). Each of the
responses for the label characteristics were converted to a
weighted average score for the total sample according to sex,
education and the College Educated Frequent Consumers. (See
Tables 1A, 17 and 20) Tables 15, 18 and 21 show the percent
who rated each characteristic "extremely important" and "not
important at all" for the total sample according to sex,
education, and the College Educated Frequent Consumers.

Table 9 shows the weighted scores of the total
respondents in descending order, and label characteristics in
only the percent who rated each characteristic "extremely
important" and "not important at all." Of the 11 factors
rated, it is clear that what the respondents want to know
most is whether the wine is dry or sweet. An average
score was given of A.1 with 55% rating it extremely important.
Color of wine is the second most important factor to these
users, who give it an average score of 3.A with 29% indicating
the color of wine was extremely important in wine selection.
Price was rated third most important in wine selection with
an average score of 3.2. It was rated extremely important
by 2A% of the respondents. The proper serving temperature

and stating whether it is a varietal or blend type follow

55

.noC wCHHonmq pr mCmexowm Cfimm an Conflsvom \m

.HHm nm nCmnCOCEH nOC no pCm HZCnCOCEH mHoEoCnxo um.!po>HmXPH
oenmnnonomaCo Como mnCHOC no ConECC mwmmo>w oCn Co Comma one Co>Hw monoom oCB \w

 

wmmnoHCEmm CH .02

 

 

0.2m o.m :.H oCHB oCn nsonw anonm
o.m: o.m :.H I nConCoo oHCoawo
a.mm a.mH m.m I \n neonsoo Hoeoofia
0.5H o.mm m.m \C cannon oCn CH nCCoE<
o.HH o.mH m.m Cnfiz mCfiz meom on nmCz
o.oH o.Hm m.m \n oEmC CCwnm
o. o.ma H.m ApCoHn .m> Hwnmfipm>v came
w.HH o.am H.m oCannoQEon wCH>Com
0.5 0.:m m.m ooehm
s.© 0.0m :.m Anoaoov mCfiz no mghB
:.m o.mm H.: Andean .m> mnpv oCHS no maze
nCooCom \m monoom
Ham nm nCmnCOCEH oCoom owwno>m monnmfinonomCmCo Honda
nCmnCOCEH noz hHoEoCnxm awnOB

 

wCHnmC nCooCom

 

.moCoom pmnCmHms owmno>m pCm :Ham nm nCmnCOCEH noC: UCm =nCanOQEH
afloEoCnxoz no wCflnmC nCooCoC CH mofinmflnonomCmCo Honda an mnCmpCoame Hmnoe lam oHnt

 

56

with equal importance (3.1 weighted scores). It is interest-
ing to note that these wine users consider the brand to be
a matter of moderate importance, along with the information
about what to serve the wine with. Rated least important
were alcohol content, caloric content and story about the
wine. Only 18% rated alcohol content as extremely important.
The average score given was a 2.3. Alcohol content and
caloric content each were given average scores of 1.A and
rated extremely important by only 9.0% and 5.0%, respectively.

Significantly more respondents with some high school
education indicated that the price of wine was extremely
important in selecting a wine. Forty-five percent of those
respondents with some high school rated price of wine as
eXtTemelY'important in their wine selection, resulting in
an average score of 3.7.

The type of wine (color), amount in the bottle,
what foods to serve with and caloric content were rated
more important to women than men in selecting a wine. These
relationships were statistically significant. Thirteen
percent of the females rated caloric content as extremely
important, while only A% of the men rated caloric content
as extremely important. Thirty-six percent of the females
rated the color of wine as extremely important versus 22%
rated extremely important by men. Twenty-six percent of the
women rated what foods to serve with extremely important
as compared to 1A% of the men. Amount in the bottle was
rated extremely important by 28% of the women as compared to

15% of the men.

 

57

What to serve wine with was less important to the

College Educated Frequent Consumers (13%) than all others(2A%).

Comments written in by respondents

The question and comment section of the questionnaire
was focused primarily on the topic of label information. Of
the total respondents, 9 wrote in comments requesting more
information of what to serve wine with, 6 on wine flavor
type, 5 on the region of origin, 5 on the year bottled and
brand of wine, 3 on the purity content/source of blended
grapes, and 3 on alcohol content. Other information
requested was (by 1 respondent each): caloric content,
wine storage, serving temperature, and vitamin/nutritional
content.

Information requested by the respondents which may
or may not pertain to the label included the importance of
wine/what wines age well, information on wine making, history
of wines and more background information on wines. In
addition, respondents needed information in assisting them
in their selection of a new wine and the selection of wine
at a "good price." A price list was also suggested for
wine selection. Five respondents said it helped to sample

the wine prior to purchase.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The following are recommendations based on the
results of this study:

1. Marketing efforts should be directed to the
college educated. This study has shown that the college
educated group was the highest percentage of the at least
once a week wine consumers. In addition, 70% of the wine
consumers with at least some college education reported
using wine at least once a week (referred to as the College
Educated Frequent Consumers in this study).

a. Label information should be constructed
according to the responses on label characteristics by
the College Educated Frequent Consumers. (See Recommendation #6)
b. Friends and relatives should be incorporated
in wine advertising and other marketing strategies. This
group was the single most important influence in wine
buying, especially to the College Educated Frequent Consumers.
c. A strong campaign targeted at College
Educated Frequent Consumers is needed to increase the use
of Michigan wines. California wine companies are currently
advertising heavily. Therefore, there is a need to meet
this competition. In addition, the College Educated
Frequent Consumers reported buying more of California wines

(75%) than Michigan wines (A6%).

58

59

d. Michigan wines, designated for table use,
should be sold in larger sizes. The results of this study
showed that larger sizes, 1/2 liter and larger, are bought
more by the College Educated Frequent Consumers, than other
respondents. Furthermore, the College Educated Frequent
Consumers consume wines for ordinary use more than any
other use.

2. Roll-on closures should be placed on wine bottles
intended for ordinary use and low priced wines.

3. The use of capsules is recommended on roll-on
closures. The capsules enhanced the perceived attributes
of the wine. Thirty—seven percent of the total respondents
indicated that they would not buy the roll-on cap without
the capsule. The foil capsule on the roll-on however,
decreases the perception of ease in opening.

A. No other changes are recommended on the "other
closures." But further studies are suggested in the
following section (See further investigations).

5. A review of the industry's position is recommended
in regard to the flavor keeping properties of corks and
screw caps. The results of this study showed that there is
a marked difference between the perceptions of corks and
screw caps in keeping wine flavor.

6. Wine labels are recommended to include the wine's
overall sweetness such as dry, sweet, or in between. The
classified sweetness should be prominently listed in bold

letters, directly below the name of the product. The

60
type size should be 1/2 the size of the name of the product.
Sweetness or dryness of the wine was rated the most
important factor (received a A.1 out of a 5 rating). Thus,
sweetness or dryness should be clearly visible on the wine
label. The story about the wine should receive less
emphasis. This survey has shown that the wine story was
rated least important by the respondents. However,
caloric content might well be included on wine labels,
although rated of little importance. With health oriented
society, the caloric content is becoming increasingly
important to consumers. This study showed that women,
more than men, regarded caloric content as being important
in their wine selection. The caloric information is
recommended to be in measures most easily understood such

as in calories per 3.5 ounce serving.

 

 

FURTHER INVESTIGATIONS

Additional research is recommended on the label
information. This would aid the wine consumers in
making their wine selection. There are inconclusive
data on the influence of wine closures on consumers'
wine selection. Suggestions for further study on both
these areas are as follows:

1. Further study is required on the importance
of brand name in wine selection. Brand name was reported
as being an important influence on wine purchase decisions.
However, inethe responses on label information, there were
inconsistencies in this measurement.

2. Controlled graphics and environment should be
tested on label information. In controlled graphics
and environments, portions of the label content can be
varied to determine their influence on consumer purchase
decisions.

3. A test should be conducted to determine to
what extent consumers read labels on wines. The study
should determine what information consumers take from the
label, time spent looking at labels, and what process is
involved in making their purchase decision.

IA. Measure, by observation and interview the
percentage of people who buy corked and non-corked wines

in the store.

61

62

5. Data on closures have not been conclusive.
More kinds of capsule combinations should be used to
determine their influences on purchases. The types of
closures to be surveyed should include screw caps, screw
caps with shrink capsules and roll-on with shrink capsules.

Emphasis should be placed on closures sold in largest

quantities.

APPENDICES

APPENDIX I

The Questionnaire

63

Appendix I - The Questionnaire

Michigan State University no.

INTRODUCTION: This is a survey on wines including champagne, dessert wines and table

5.

wines. I would like to ask you a few questions about your buying and
use of wines.

Have you or any member of your household bought any wine in the last year (for
home consumption and/or as a gift)?

D1 D2
Yes No
(If your answer is no, you need not complete this

questionaire. Thank you very much.)
Who in the household usually_buys the wine? Check one.

a m2 [:13 ma

female male male and other (explain)
female

 

Of the wines you and members of your household bought in the last year, for what
purpose did you buy them? Check those that apply.

I Iordinary table use

I lguests/parties
[::]special occasion

D cooking

'—~Ias a gift
I .

——i

[::]other (explain)

 

Where did members of your household usually buy wines within the last year?
Check those that apply.

I isupermarket

;._Iliquor store/party store

§.-Idrug store

:9

; lconvenience store

[::30ther (explain)

 

What size container(s) did you usually buy during the last year? Check those
that ppm .
I I750 ml (fifth)

_

[:11 liter/quart

 

D other (explain)

CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE

10

ll

12

18

20

21

22

23

6.

\O

614

7

When you are about to buy a wine you have not tried before, which of the following
factors would most influence your selection of wine. Check those that app y.

[:Jdescriptive information on label
I::]brand name

[:Jliquor clerk recommendation
[::]friends or relatives recommendation

I Imagazine/newspaper advertisement

I:I price
:Iwine guide

[::]other (explain)

 

From where do most of the wines come from, that you and members of your family buy?
Check those that apply.

I:I California

I: New York

I Inever paid any attention to where it is from
I Iother (explain)

 

How often is wine consumed in your household? (Whetherid;ijs bought or wine
received as a gift.) Check one.

'31 El D3 D Us
3-6 times 1-2 times 2-3 times every month 1-5 times
a week a week a month or two a year

Which type wine have you and members of your household consumed the most of in
the last year? Check one.

Cr D2 D3 D“

domestic or imported champagne/cold duck/ port/sherry/ do not know
dinner table wines sparkling wines dessert wines the type

9a. If you selected dinner table wines, which of these do you most often
drink? sages 22 v.0 me.
I:Iwhite/dry
[:I white/semi-dry
red/dry
red/semi-sweet
rose

not sure

DDDDD

other (explain)

 

CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE

24
25
26
27
28
29
30

31

32
33
34
35
36
37

38

39

40

1.1
42
43
44
45
1.6

A7

65

NOW PLEASE LOOK AT THE DISPLAY OF WINES.

 

In questions 10-14 please look at the four containers of wine displayed on the
table. Each container is identified by a different letter of the alphabet.

10.

12.

14.

Circle the letter(s) that refers to the properties you feel are true of the
containers.

 

Circle one p_ more letteggs) for each line.

 

 

" keeps the mouth of the bottle clean R T M L
" can tell if it has been opened..... R T M L
' easy to open....................... R T M L
’ easy to reclose for storage........ R T M L
" higher quality product............. R T M L
" keeps flavor better................ R T M L

Circle the letter(s) that refers to the container you would buy for the
following.

 

 

 

Circle ppp,p_lmore letter(8) £22 each lipg.
" as a gift......................... R T M L
‘ for ordinary table use............ R T M L
‘ for a party/special occasion...... R T M L

Circle the letter(s) that refers to the container(s) 122 33213 223 221°
R
T D Check here if you would buy all of than.
M
L
Circle the letter(s) that refers to the container(s) you think have 22552.
R
T
M [::ICheck here if you think none have corks.
L

What price range(s) would you expect for each of the wine containers displayed?

Menuth 8 9.122.021.1942.
$2.99 and below R T M L
33.00 - 35.99 R T M L
36.00 and above R T M L

 

THIS IS THE END OF QUESTIONS ON THE DISPLAY. PLEASE CONTINUE TO NEXT PAGE.

48-51
52-55
56-59
60-63
64-67

68-71
Col 80-1

10-13

14-17

18
19
20

21

22
23
24

25

26-29
30-33

34-37

15.

l6.

17.

18.

H
\0
O

66

4

From your standpoint, a cork in a bottle of wine is: For each line A - C check

 

one of the pairs.
., [:11 L12

 

easy to open or hard to open
8- E11 E12
keeps flavor or does not keep flpyor well

 

g. a.

easy to reclose or hard to reclose

While in the process of buying wine in the store if you knew that there was a cork
on the bottle, would you: Check one.

[11 C12 CI:

prefer to buy prefer not to not care either
the wine buy the wine way

From your standpoint, a screw cap on a bottle of wine is: For eacp line A - C

check one of the airs.

A. D1 D2

 

 

 

Easy to open or hard to open
.. a D
1 2
kee s flavor or does not kee flavor well

 

 

C. [:3 1 [::I2

easy to reclose or hard to reclose

While in the process of buying the wine in the store, if you knew that there was
a screw cap on the bottle would you: Check one.

D [32 C13

prefer to buy prefer not to not care either
the wine buy the'fiIhe way

While in the store, you need certain information to make a choice between different
wines. Below are some items which may help you make your decision.

For each line below,circ1e one of the numbers from 0-5. Let g be of no importance,
1 be of little importance and 5 be most important.

Circle one number per line.

of no of little most
serving temperature 0 1 2 3 4 5
what to serve wine with O l 2 3 4 5
brand name 0 1 2 3 4 5
type of wine (dry vs. sweet) 0 1 2 3 4 5
type of wine (color), 0 l 2 3 4 5
type of wine 0 1 2 3 4 5
(varietal vs. uiend)
story about the wine 0 1 2 3 4 5
amount in the bottle 0 l 2 3 4 5
price 0 l 2 3 4 5
calorie content 0 l 2 3 4 5
alcohol content 0 1 2 3 4 5

CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE

38

39'

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52
53
54
55

56

 

 

67

 

NOW A FEW QUESTIONS ABOUT YOU AND YOUR FAMILY.

 

20. How many prople are living in your household now, (including yourself)?

1I:I2
21. Are there any children under 18 currently in your household? [:1
Yes No
I I1 I I2 1
22. Are you: Check one.
Male Female

23. What age range do you fit into? Check one,

I:II D2 D3 D“ D5

under 26 26-35 36-45 46-55 56 and over

24. How much formal education have you had: Check pne,

D D2 [13 D4 Us

some high sampleted technical school/ some college/ completed
school high school apprenticeship business school college or beyond

25. What was the total family income for 1980 (before taxes deducted)? Check one.

:11 [32 C12 a. a.

 

under $10,000- $15,000- $25,000- 335.000
310.000 314.999 824.999 834.999 and over
COMMENTS:

What questions do you have about wine buying?

 

 

 

What other information would you like to have about wines?

 

 

 

Other comments:

 

 

 

 

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR COOPERATION. PLEASE BE SURE YOU HAVE ANSWERED ALL
QUESTIONS BEFORE TURNING IN THE QUESTIONNAIRE.

57-58

59

6O

61

63

C01. 80=2

APPENDIX II

Tables 10—21

68

Table 10-- Total respondents by purchase,
and closure comparisons.

consumption patterns

 

 

 

Purchase and’ TotaIi Purchase and A
consum t' 1 ' éBtSi
p ion samp e consumption m e
Percent g7 Percent Q/
Household purchaser Frequency of consump.
male 25.6 3- times/week 11.1
female 39.1 1-2 times/week 27.3
male + female 35.3 2—3 times/month 26.3
100.0 1 time/ month 18.9
Intended use a/ l_5 times/year 1&8 g
ordinary use 55.6 '
guests/parties 68.0 Type of wine
special occasion 51.5 table 69.“
cooking 17.5 sparkling 13.6
gift 26.3 dessert 7.2
other “.“ do not know type 2.7
Place of purchase a/ no response 15%;%
supermarket 71.0
liquor store 6“.6 Type of wine 3/
drug store 3.0 white-dry 21.5
convenience store 15.2 white semi—dry 30.0
other 8.“ red-dry 11.“
Size of container a/ red/semi-sweet 3é'6
750 m1 ‘ “7.8 rose 2 '9
1 liter 52.2 not sure 2.“
. other 0.7
6:; galign %%:$ not applicable 21.9
1 gallon 8.8 Closure properties a/
other 2.0 keep mouth clean
Influences a/ plastic/cork 65'9
label ” 39.“ r8. ’0“ 32°2
b fOil/roll—on 60.8
rand name “0.7 1‘ _

. ead/cork 52.“
liquor clerk 13.5 no res onse 8 1
friends/relatives 65.0 p '
advertisement 7.“ can tell if opened
price 26.9 plastic/cork 62.8
wine guide 10.8 roll—on 51.5
other “.0 foil/roll-on 25.3
. . . lead/cork 3.1

origigogg Wine g/ “0.7 no response 7.7
Ohio 1.“ easy to open

Michigan 3“.6 plastic/cork 13.7

California 61.“ roll-on 89.8

New York 10.5 foil/roll—on 30.5

pay no attention 16.9 lead/cork 13.0

no response “.0

 

69

Table 10—- Continued

 

 

 

Closure Total Closure Total
comparisons sample comparisons sample
Percent 2/ Percent 9/
Closure properties (cont'd 5 Closure have cork a/
easy to reclose plastic/cork 70.0
plastic/cork 23.7 roll—on 1.0
roll—on 85.3 foil/roll—on 27.6
foil/roll—on “1.6 lead/cork 7“.“
lead/cork 18.7 no response 1.3
no response 6’1 Price expected a/
higher quality $2.99 and below
plastic/cork “1.3 plastic/cork 15.9
roll—on 6.8 roll-on 78.0
foil/roll-on 52.3 foil/roll—on 9.2
lead/cork 52.5 lead/cork 5.“
no response 11.1, no response 0.7
keeps flavor better $3.00—5.99
plastic/cork 53.“ plastic/cork 55.9
roll-on 18.7 roll-on 18.0
foil/roll-on 38.2 foil/roll-on 52.9
lead/cork 59.2 lead/cork 52.2
no response 11.8 no response 0.7
Purpose for purchase a/ $6.00 and above
gift plastic/cork 23.7
plastic/cork “0.2 roll-on 2.0
roll—on 7.5 foil/roll-on 30.2
foil/roll—on 5“.1 lead/cork 39.0
lead/cork 53.0 no response 0.7
no response 5.“ Cork
ordinary use easy to open 3“.6
plastic/cork 37.5 hard to open 60.6
roll-on 38.9 no response “.8
foil/roll—on “1.7 100.0
lead/cork “1.3 keeps flavor better 89.2
no response 3.0 does not keep flavor 7.1
party/spec. occ. no response 103 g
plastic/cork “3.0 ‘
roll-on 16.1 easy to reclose 38.7
foil/roll—on “9.8 hard to reclose 56.2
lead/cork 53.8 no response 5.1
no response 6.1 100.0
Closure not buy a/ prefer f i0'3
plastic/cork 9.9 no pre er 5'3
not care 53.3
roll—on 37.3 1 l
foil/rollron 6.8 no response 16646
lead/cork 7.2
no response 1.7

70

Table 10-- Continued

 

 

 

Closure Total
comparisons sample
Percent b/
Screw cap _
easy to open 9“.6
hard to open 2.7
no response 2.7
100 0

keeps flavor better “3.“
does not keep flavor 51.2
no response 5 “

 

 

 

 

100 0
easy to reclose 92.2
hard to reclose 3.“
no response “.“
100 0
prefer 16.5
not prefer 20.5
not care 61 3
no response 1.7
100 O
Label degree of importance
information 0 l 2 3 “ 5 no response
Percent 2/
Serving temp. 72.2 13.3 8.“ 18.5 15.0 32.5 3.7
What to serve 12.1 11.7 11.3 26.2 18.1 20.6 5.1
Brand name 10.“ 13.2 12.5 26.0 16.3 21.5 3.0
Type (dry vs.
sweet) 2.“ 3.8 “.2 13.2 19.“ 56.9 “.0
Type (color) 7.0 8.1 6.7 26.0 21.8 30.5 “.0
Type (var. vs.
blend) 6.7 11.0 12.1 30.5 19.5 20.2 5.1
Story 35.1 26.3 16.5 12.6 “.2 5.3 “.0
Amount 18.2 15.“ 9.“ 21.3 12.6 23.1 3.7
Price 7.3 7.3 9.“ 33.0 18.8 2“.3 3.0
Calorie “3.7 22.0 8.0 10.8 5.9 9.“ 3.7
Alcohol 25.8 19.5 8.“ 16.0 12.2 18.1 3.“
N=297

 

6/ Can give more than one response.
—/ Values are for positive responses.

- Can check two types of table wines most often
consumed.

71

 

 

Akmv Ammo Ammo AmHHV Ammo Aommv madsmw :H .02
n.m 0.0 0.0 3.: 0.0 o.m monuo
*m.oa *o.om *s.m *s.m m.H w.m coaamw H
m.ma H.5m s.Hm ©.ma m.wa m.om soaamw m.o
m.oa m.m m.m m.:H m.> w.oa popfia m.H
a.mz m.m: m.mm o.m: m.sm a.mm smpfifi H
m.m: m.w: 2.0: m.Hm m.m: o.w: I as 0mm
\m mocfimpsoo mo swam
Asmv Ammo Ammo AMHHV Ammv Aommv mfidsmm cH .oz
m.oa m.:H H.N m.w m.m z.m monpo
w.oH :.HH m.:H m.mH m.mH m.mH whoum mocoficm>coo
o.o N.m m.H m.m m.m o.m oQOpm wasp
m.m: *w.w: *w.ow $0.0m *m.mm m.:o oQOpm posoHH
o.m> a.mm m.w> a.mm w.Hw m.Hw l pomeELoQSm
\@ ommnohsm mo oomam
Anmv Ammv Ammv Amaav Ammv Ammmv oHQEmm CH .02
H.@ m.m m.m >.m m.w :.: sospo
a.mm :.Hm o.mfi a.mm a.mm 0.0m scam
m.wa H.NH o.mm o.ma m.:a m.NH wmwxooo
*m.mm *>.m: $0.3: *m.om *m.wm :.Hm COHmwooo Hmfiooam
m.:m :.Hn a.mm m.mm m.:m m.>m mummm\pmo5w
*m.mo *m.:e *m.z© *s.mz *m.ms a.mm mm: masseuse
\m om: ooococh
Aemv Ammo Ammo Amado Ammo Ammmv madamm ca .02
bubbfi bbbba bubbfl bbbba 0.00H bkbba
:.mm 0.0: p.mm m.mm m.om m.mm onEom + mama
a.mm p.mm m.mm w.wm m.wa m.mm mama
m.mm m.:m H.H: m.:m 0.0m m.wm onEow
sommnopsm oaozomsom
\m pcoopom
memos momma momma momma mhmom oaqemm COHpQESwCoo
mm o>on< mmwm: mwlmm mmnmm mm soaom HmpOB osm ommnomsm

 

 

.mCOmHmeEoo omSmoHo pom mcsoppma COHpQESmcoo .ommnopza mo mpsoocoamom mo om< IIHH canoe

 

72

 

Ammo Afimv Amzv A000 Amsv Ammmv madsmm as .02
0.m 0.0 0.0 0.0 :.N 0.0 omnpo
0.0 0.0 0.: 0.: :.m 0.m oMSm pom
0.0m 0.H: m.mm :.Hm 0.0: 0.3m WmOL
*0.mm *m.mm $0.0m *n.0: *m.0m 0.0: poozmlfisom ooh
:.Hm 0.0 0.0m a.mH 0.0 0.:H apolcom
0.mm m.m: 0.0: p.mm 0.Hm 3.0m maunafiow mafia:
0.0m 0.H: 0.0m :.Hm 0.0a 0.5m Mmolmpfizz
\o mafia oHnt
m mmmv
0A.00m00H 0A.H0m00H ohmozovfi 0A.00000H 0A. 0:00H 0A. 0 0 H oHQEmm 5H . oz
$0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.: *0.0 0.m mam» somx pom oo
*0.mfi *m.0 *:.0 *0.0 *0.H 0.s pommmmo
$0.0 $0.0 *m.HH *m.ma *o.mm 0.:H wcHHxsmdm
$0.00 *0.00 *m.0m *:.Hw *H.m> 0.2» cameo
one: mo mamB
A0mv Ammv A000 ANHHV A000 Az0mv oHQEmm CH .02
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.H 0.0 0.0 mozpo
*0.0 *:.HH *m.:H *:.Hm *0.mm 5.0H GOHpsoppm oz 000
:.0H :.HH 5.0H 0.0H 0.m 0.0a xmow 362
3.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.H0 mammomfiamo
*:.:: *0.m0 $5.0m $0.0m $0.0m 0.:m Gmwwnofiz
0.0 0.m 0.H 0.0 0.0 :.H oaso
H.0m a.mm a.mm 0.m: p.mm 0.0: I poomEH
\0 mafia mo cHmeo
\m pmoohmm
momma. mhwom momma momma mpmom oamsmm mowpmezcho
mm o>on< 0010: m0u0m mmnmm mm soaom H0009 0mm ommnopsm

 

 

emscflpcoo :HH oases

73

 

Ammv Ammo A000 10020 Ammo A0000 020500 :0 .oz
2.0H 0.H0 0.0a 2.00 0.0a 0.0a xmoo\omoa
0.02 0.02 0.00 >.H2 0.02 0.02 :OIHH09\HHom
2.20 0.00 5.00 2.00 5.00 0.00 sonaaom
0.0H 0.0a 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 xpoo\ofipmmam
omoaooh on 0mmm
A000 A000 A000 AOHHV A000 A2000 maaemm CH .02
0.0a 0.0a H.0 2.0H 0.0H 0.0a xhoo\omoa
0.02 0.20 0.00 0.H0 0.00 0.00 sonaaom\aflow
0.0» 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 monaaop
0.0a H.0H 2.0H 0.0a 0.0 2.0a xmoo\owpmmam
Como ou mmwo
Afimv A000 A200 A0020 A000 10500 022500 c0 .02
2.02 0.00 5.00 0.00 p.00 0.00 xhoo\00ofi
H.00 p.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 conaaop\afiom
0.02 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.H0 conaaos
0.20 5.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 o.m0 0200\0000020
vocomo 00 Haop 200
A000 A200 A200 A0020 A000 A0500 020800 :0 .02
0.02 0.H0 H.02 0.00 0.02 0.00 xmoo\00oa
0.02 0.20 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 :ouaaom\aflo0
$0.00 $2.02 $0.02 $0.00 $2.00 2.00 couaaop
0.00 H.00 2.0» 0.00 0.00 0.00 xpoo\oflpwmaa
swoao npsoe wmoox
I \m mofippoaopa madmoao
\o osmosom
mpwom momma mono» 09000 mhmom oaaewm msomflommsoo
00 o>op< 00102 mw|00 00:00 00 zoaom Hmpoe madmoao

 

 

eossflpcoo --HH magma

7“

 

A200 A000 2000 20020 2000 20000 020800 :2 .02
0.22 0.00 2.22 0.02 0.00 0.22 2200\0002
2.00 2.52 0.50 5.52 0.50 0.22 220:22o2\2202
0.22 0.00 2.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 20:2202
0.00 2.00 2.02 0.20 0.02 0.50 2200\0200020
003 02022020
2200 2000 2000 20020 2000 20000 020000 :2 .02
2.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.50 0.00 2200\0002
$2.02 $0.02 $0.00 *0.52 $0.00 0.00 00-22o2\22o2
0.02 2.22 0.0 2.5 5.0 0.5 220:2202
0.00 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.00 2.02 2200\0200020
I 0220
\0 00020250 202 0000250
2000 2000 2020 22020 2200 22000 020000 :2 .02
5.20 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.20 2.00 2200\0002
0.20 0.50 0.02 0.50 0.50 0.00 00-22o2\22o2
0.20 2.00 0.00 0.02 5.02 0.02 220:2202
2.22 0.02 0.20 2.00 0.20 0.00 2000\0200020
202000 2o>022 00002
2000 2000 2000 22020 2200 20000 020000 02 .02
2.02 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 5.00 2200\0002
0.00 0.00 0.20 2.02 0.00 2.00 220:2202\220.2
2.02 2.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 2012202
0.00 2.20 0.02 0.22 0.22 2.22 2200\0200020
0022050 202022
A 0.20000 0022200020 0250020
\m 2:00200
02000 02000 02000 0200M 02000 020800 00002200800
00 0>00< 00-02 '02.00 00-00 00 20200 20002 0250020

 

 

002020000 -u22 02002

 

75

 

A000 A000 A000 20220 2200 A2000 022800 22 .02
5.22 2.20 5.00 0.20 5.00 2.00 2200\0002
0.00 0.20 0.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 20122o2\2202
5.02 0.00 2.02 0.02 2.20 0.02 2012202
2.00 2.50 0.20 0.00 2.22 2.00 2200\0220022
00.0100.00
A000 2000 2000 20220 2200 22000 020200 02 .oz
0.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 5.0 2.0 2200\0002
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.02 0.2 0.0 20122o2\22o2
5.00 2.25 2.00 2.20 0.05 0.55 2012202
2.02 2.52 0.00 0.02 2.22 0.02 2200\0200020
30202 020 02.00
\0 00222
2000 A000 A000 A0220 A200 A0000 022800 22 .02
*2.50 $0.25 $0.05 *2.00 *2.05 0.25 2200\0002
0.20 2.20 0.00 5.50 2.00 2.50 20122o2\2202
0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.2 2012202
0.00 5.00 5.00 2.25 0.05 0.05 lx2oo\o2pm022
\0 2200 0>02 0220020
2000 2000 2200 20020 2000 A050v 022800 22 .02
0.20 5.00 2.02 0.00 2.00 0.00 2200\0002
0.00 0.50 5.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 2o122o2\2202
$0.20 *m.5m *m.m *m.w2 *m.m2 0.02 COI2202
20.50 00.20 00.00 00.02 02.00 0.02 2200\0220020
.ooo .o020\0p202
A 0.22000 00020222 202 0002222
\m 2200202
02000 02000 02000 02000 02000 022800 02002202800
00 0>02< 00102 02200 00100 00 30202 20202 0220020

 

 

000020000 1122 02002

76

 

2000 2200 2000 22220 2000 22000 020200 02 .oz
.p5pp2 05002 05002 05002 .b5bb2 05002
$5.00 $0.20 $2.02 $0.00 $0.00 0.00 0200 000
*0.m2 $5.22 *0.mm *2.52 $0.2m 0.00 202022 208
$2.02 $0.00 $0.50 $2.22 $0.0 0.02 202020
2000 A200 2000 20220 A200 20000 022800 22 .02
05002 b5bb2 05002 b5bb2 05002 .p5pp2
0.0 0.0 0.0 5.0 2.5 0.0 0002002 02 0202
0.002 2.50 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 0002002 on 0000
A200 A200 2200 25020 2200 20000 022800 22 .02
05002 .p5pw2 05002 050b2 05002 05002
$5.00 $2.00 $2.22 $0.20 $0.00 0.20 202022 0002 000 0000
$0.20 $0.05 $0.00 $0.00 $0.20 5.02 2o>022 0022 00002
A200 2000 2200 20220 2000 20000 022800 22 .oz
.p5p02 05002 05002 05002 05002 05002
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 2020 02 0202
0.002 2.50 2.20 0.00 2.00 0.50 2020 02 0000
200 30200
A000 A000 2000 20220 2200 22000 022800 22 .02
0.00 0.02 2.00 0.02 0.50 0.00 2200\0002
0.02 0.02 5.00 0.00 0.50 0.00 00122o2\22o2
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 2012202
20.0 *0.00 *0.00 *5.00 $0.50 0.00 2200\0220022
0>020 020 00.00
I 2.0.22000 00222
\2 2200202
02000.. 02000 02000 02000 02000 022800 02002202800
00 0>002 00102 02100 00100 00 30200 20002 0200020

 

 

202222200 1122 0220B

77

.Hm>ma &m pa pamOHmHsmfim pmop mumsvm H30

 

 

*
.UmESmcoo cmp%o pmoE meHz mfinwp mo mmmmp OBponvzv swo gm
.mmsoammp m>HpHmom pom mam mmdam> \m
.mmcommmp mco swap mace m>fiw :mo \m
Aomv Ammv Ammv ANHHV Ammv Ammmv mHQEmm sfl .oz
bbbbfi bbbbfl bwbba bnbba bhbbfi bwbba
*H.Hm *m.w: *m.om *o.wm *o.m: 2.2m mamo no:
*>.©H *N.mm *m.mm *m.HH *m.m m.mH amgmpm no:
*m.mm *N.mm *m.mm $3.0m *m.mz m.om mmmmhm
I IIII.I:. xLoo
\Q pcmommm
mammz mpmmz mammz mpmmh mummh mHQEMm mcomHHmQEoo
mm m>on< mmlmz mzlmm mmlmm mm BOHmm proe madmoao

 

 

Umzcflpsoo IIHH ®HQMB

V a, id
u). 1%.)ng r’l‘w KW

. o

Vs .
I».

~
\
I:

 

 

78

 

 

 

Aomv AHNV Ammv Ammv Amav Ammmv mHQEmw 2H .02
N.H :.H H.m N.m m.oa m.m pmgpo
o.m m.HH :.MH ~.m a.mH m.oa mofisw mafia
m.mm :.mm m.»m 0.0: H.Hm :.wm mafipa
>.© m.m m.n >.m m.oa m.» psmEmmepm>um
m.mm m.wp a.mo m.:m m.~m 0.5m mm>fipwfimpxmccmfipg
0.0H a.mH a.mfi 0.0m m.m m.mH xywao posvfia
m.m: H.m: m.o: m.mm m.Hm H.o: mews camps
*m.wm *m.m: *m.am *:.Hm *w.©m w.o: I Hmnmfi
\@ mmocmzamcH
Aomv AHNV Awmv Ammv Amfiv Amwmv mfiaemm ca .02
m.m :.H H.m m.m H.HH m.o mmzpo
o.mm w.mm m.mm 0.0m H.Hm m.mm pgfiw
5.0m p.mfi m.wa :.HH m.m H.wH wcflxooo
5.0: 5.5m p.mm m.w: ©.Hm m.am :Oflmmooo Hmfiomgm
0.0m m.MN m.Hm N.mo m.>m m.ww mppma\pmmsm
*~.mm *:.mm *m.:m *m.:m *H.Hm H.Nm mm: mpmqfiomo
\m mmd UmwflmeH
Aomv AHNV Apmv Ammv Amfiv Amwmv magemm cfi .oz
bhbbfi bwbba o.ooH o.oofl o.ooa o.ooH
*o.o: *N.m: *H.om $0.0m *:.OH m.:m madamw + mama
*m.wm *m.mm *N.mm $0.0m *:.Hm a.mm mama
*m.am *:.:m *m.H: *o.om *m.m© a.mm mamamm
pmmmgopsm caonmmsom
\m pcmommm
pm>o wcm mmmflzma mmmnzmfi mam.:aa QOOGOHa mHQEmm SOHpQESmsoo
coo.mme -ooonmma noooflmww loocflofiw pmmap Hmpoex - cam mmmnopzm

 

 

.mGOmeeroo
madmoao 62m msgmppwg COHpQESmcoo «mmwsopsa hp mpcmwcoammp mo mHm>mH mEoocH IINH magma

 

79

 

Ammv Ampv Ammv Amfiv Ammmv mHaEmm 2H .02
m.H 0.0 0.: 0.0 m.o amnpo
N.F :.H 0.: 0.0 ».m mgsm pom
m.m: a.mm o.wm 0.0m m.:m Wmop
*o.mm *m.mz xo.w: *m.mm $.03 pmmzmuflamm amp
m.mH m.m 0.0m p.mm m.mfi zpcuuma
3.0: :.mm o.mm m.ma o.mm mmunflsmm mafia:
a.mm o.mm o.wH N.o :.>m Myanmpfigz
\o mcfls magma
Awmv Ammv Ammv Awav Ammmv ®HQEmm CH .02
o.ooa bwbbfl o.ooa o.ooH o.ooH
0.0 m.m o.m 0.0 N.m mazp zocx no: ow
w.H m.© :.m H.HH m.m ppmmmmc
m.:H 2.5H a.mfi H.HH H.2H mafiaxawam
a.mw a.mp m.ww $.55 m.op magma
mafia mo mama
Aomv Ammv Ammv Amfiv Aowmv mfiasmm cH .oz
N.H 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 pmnpo
p.mfi 5.:H a.mm m.oa a.mH QOfipcmppm on man
0.0H :.m :.HH m.m 3.0H xpow zmz
0.0m m.m© m.:m 2.»: :.H@ manpowfiamo
*w.wz *m.am *o.ow *m.m m.:m cmwficoaz
m.m 0.0 0.0 0.0 H.H oano
m.m: m.om 0.0: m.m© m.H: I ppomsfi
I \@ mcfiz mo cflwfipo
\o. pflmohmm
pm>o cam mmm.zmw mmmnzma mam.:a$ ooo.oaa mHQEmm :OHpQESmcoo
pooamM% -ooonmmm locommfiw .aooonoam pmccs. Hmpoei. cam mmmzopsm

 

 

umzcfipsoo unmfi magma

 

80

 

Ammv Ammv Ammv Azmv Away Ammmv mHQEmm 2H .02
m.HH m.Hm m.mm w.HH o.mm n.wa xgoo\©mma
m.qm 0.5: H.:: :.mm m.m: w.H: couaaopxaflom
a.mw a.mm m.:m m.mw m.>m m.mw conaaom
m.wa p.mm F.3m $.5H a.mq a.mm xaoo\0HpmmHQ
mmoaomh Op mmmm
Awmv Ammv Ammv Ammv Amav Ammmv mamewm 2H .02
m.mH a.mH m.ma :.HH m.ma m.ma xaooxwmma
m.mm m.:m m.om m.:m m.>m m.Hm soufiaoa\aflog
m.mm a.mm m.wm H.wm o.ooa p.mm couaaop
m.mH o.mH m.HH o.m o.mm m.ma xpoo\0prmHa
cmao 0p mmmm
Ammv Awmv Ammv Ammv AQHV Ammmv mfiafimW CH .02
m.ow p.mm a.mm m.Hn a.mw m.:m xmoo\©mmfi
m.~m 0.3» a.mw H.mm m.Hm m.©w nOIHHopxafiom
m.om m.w: H.wm m.o: 0.0m m.Hm sonaaop
a.mw m.H© a.mm m.©m m.w© m.mm xpoo\0HpmmHg
Umcmao %H Hamp Qmo
Ammv Aoov AHQV Ammv ANHV Ammmv .
m.fim 0.0m m.mm m.w: H.>: m.mm maaemmowwvmwfl
p.09 m.mm H.5m ”.mm w.wm o.mw COIHHOA\HHOM
*m.mm *o.mz *m.:m *m.am *m.mm numm sonawom
:.H> m.m© m.mm m.m> m.ow w.oo xhoo\0HpmeQ
:mmao £9508 mmmox
l \m_mmaphmmopm madmoao
_ \n psmopmm
gm>o Ucm mmm.:mw mmm.:ma mamazaw ooo.oaw wHQEmm msomfinmqeoo
ooo.mmw :ooo.mmfi -ooo.mam uooo.oam, amass Hmpoe magmoao

 

 

Umscfipsoo numH magma

 

 

Aomv Aopv Azmv Azmv AFHV Ampmv mHQEmm SH .02
N.H: ©.m: m.om a.mm a.mz w.H: xmoo\vmoa
N.H: a.mm m.m: :.mm :.mm m.m: conHH0h\HHow
0.0: w.mm a.mm m.wm a.mm m.mm sonaaop
m.m: m.:: m.mm a.mm m.mm m.mm xpoo\0HpmeQ
mm: mpwcflcho
Aumv Aopv Ammv Ammv ANHV Amomv mHQEmm cfl .oz
H.wm w.mm 0.0m :.m: 5.20 a.mm xpoo\©mwa
2.2m m.w: m.om ©.mw m.H: :.mm sonfifioa\aflom
o.> m.m m.© H.o w.HH :.N confifiop
a.mz H.w: p.mm m.m: m.mm m.o: xpoo\0HpmmHm
pgflm
\m mmwgohsg gom wmomhsm
Ammv Ammv Amwv Aomv Awav “Hmmv mHQEwm zfi .oz
w.mm >.mo m.om m.mm a.mp o.Hm ghoo\©mma
*H.mm *fl.m: *m.m: *w.m: *o.mm o.mm Conaaoa\fiwom
m.mfi m.wH a.mH 0.0m w.wH m.>H Coxafiom
0.0m m.om m.:m 0.0m m.mm a.mm xpoo\OHpmMHg
pmppmn ho>wfim mammx
Aomv Azmv Aomv Ammv Away Ammmv mHQEmm :fl .oz
0.0m m.>m H.Hm 3.0m a.mo m.mm xhoo\©wmfi
o.o: a.mz o.mm p.mm m.mz w.mm COIHHOL\HHom
o.m w.> m.m o.m 0.0 m.m coxfifiom
o.mm 0.0m m.mm m.:m w.m: m.a: xmoo\0Hpmmag
mpfiamzv aozwwn
A U.pcoov mmfippmmopg madmoao
\m pCmohmm
pm>o Ucw www.mmm mmmflzmm mmm.zfifi ooonoaw mHQEmm mcomfianeoo
oooan% -oooammw -ooo.mfiw sooonOHw pmusp Hmpoe whamoao

 

 

uoscflpcoo -INH mflnme

 

82

 

Aoov AH5V A5mv Ammv Amfiv Aflwmv maasmm :5 .oz
5.0m 5.0m m.Hm :.Hm w.5m a.mm xpoo\ommfi
5.mm m.mm m.Hm m.:m o.mm 5.mm sonaaop\afiom
0.0m m.ma m.ma a.mm H.HH 3.5H souaaom
a.mm a.mm m.om 0.0m 2.3: m.mm xpoo\05ummHm
mm.muoo.ma
Aoov AH5V A5mv Ammv Amav flammv mamamm :fi .02
5.H m.z m.m 5.m H.HH w.: xpoo\©mma
m.w m.m m.HH 5.m 5.wa m.m :onaaop\afiom
0.0m m.w5 m.:m m.:5 5.00 5.05 acid”?H
a.mH m.mH m.5H :.HH m.mm a.mH xpoo\0HpmmHa
onmn wcm mm.mw
\m mOHhm
Aomv AH5V Ammv Ammv Amav Aowmv oaaewm cH .oz
*m.m *m.m *mqm *:.HH *m.mm w.m xmooxommfi
*5.H $0.5 *m.m *5.m *m.mm H.o :ouaaom\afiom
5.m: a.mm m.mm 5.mm 3.2: H.5m couaaop
5.© m.HH m.m H.5H H.HH m.w xmoo\05pmmag
\m mun no: madmoao
Ammv 505V Amwv Azmv Awav Ammmv mflaswm 2H .02
5.mm :.Hm w.om H.5z m.m5 m.zm xpoo\omma
a.mz m. m m. m H.:: m.wm m.om couaaop\aflog
m.:a a.mH o. H m.om :.HH m.mH sonaaop
*m.m: *5.mm *m.mm *m.mm *5.©H m.m: xmoo\0HpmmHQ
.ooo .ommm\mumma
\m mmmmmmm AU. psoov mmmnomza mom mmoahsm
pm>o wcm mmmnzme mamazmm mmmnzaa ooo.oafi mHQEwm mcomfimwaaoo
oboammm loco.mww nooo.mam aooombam. pmwcb ammoe waxwoao

 

 

vozcfipcoo IINH maan

 

83

.Hm>mH 5m PmpchHMchHm pmmp mpmsvm H30

 

*

.Umezmcoo pmoE mmcflz magma mo mmmhp 039 x0050 £00 I

\o

.mmsoammp m>flpwmom Log mp0 mmsam> I

\n

.mmcommmp mqo can» mpoe m>Hw :00 I

\m.
A000 AH50 A550 Ammv Awflv Afiwmv magewm CH .02
0.0m 0.0: m.m H.5m 0.H0 0.0m xpoo\omma
m.mm 0.0m 0.2m 0.0m 0.5m 0.0m Conaaom\afiom
*0.0 *m.m $0.0 *m.m *H.HH w.H COIHHOp

*5.Hm *0.0m

*m.mfi *:.Hm $0.5m m.:m xpoo\ofipmmaa
. m>onm 0:0 00.00
A U. pfloov $9.0ch

 

\m psmopmm
Lm>o 0:0 000.:mm mmmnzmw 000.:H0 000.0H0 mHQEMm mCOmHthEoo
ooo.mme Iooo.mma -000.mam loco.0Hw pmmcb Hmpofi magmoao

 

 

omssfipsoo IINH mfinme

84

 

AH50 Ammfiv A5H0 5:50 AHHV Ammmv mfiasmm cfi .oz
0.m 0.H m.m :.H 0.0 0.m nmspo
*H.Hm *0.0 *m.m *5.m *0.0 0.0 coaamm H
0.0m 5.mH 0.5H a.ma 0.0 0.Hm coaflww m.o
m.ma 5.0a 0.0 m.m m.0H m.HH pmpfia m.H
0.5: 0.0m a.mm a.mm m.:m m.mm pmpfifi H
m.0m m.m: a.mm m.H: m.m: 0.5: I as 0m5
\m Lmsfiwpcoo mo muflm
AH50 Ammfiv A5H0 5:50 AHHV Ammmv mfiqemm cfl .02
:.H 0.0 m.m m.mH m.0H m.0 pmspo
$5.0H $5.0H *0.5H *:.m $0.0 m.ma mQOpm mosmficm>coo
m.mm m.m 0.0 5.m 0.0 H.m mQOpm wspc
o.m0 m.00 z.mm m.:m a.mm macaw posvfla
5.H0 5.00 0.0m m.05 m.m: m.H5 I pmxmeLmQSm
\w mmmnopsm mo moMHm
AH50 ANNHV A5H0 5:50 AHHV Ammmv magemm 0H .02
:.H m.: 0.0 0.0 0.0 H.: pmgpo
z.mm m.0m m.mm m.om m.0H 3.0m pmflw
*m.mm *5.mH *0.0 *m.m $0.0 0.5H wsflxooo
m.0w 2.00 0.05 0.00 m.m: 0.5a COHmmooo HMfloQO
m.om 3.00 0.05 0.00 m.m: m.am 5ppma\pmmsw
0.50 m.mm N.H: H.3m m.:m a.mm mm: 5gmcfiono
I \w mmd UmUCmpCH
\n pcwohmm
ccommn mwmaaoo Hoocow Hoosom swan Hooaom swflz mamem COHpQESmcoo
0cm mwmaaoo maom HmOchomB UmpmHQEoo mEom Hmpoe 0cm mmmnopsm
UmpmHQEoo

 

.wQOmHLmQEoo
magmoao 0:0 mCmepmm COHmeSmcoo «mmmnopsm mp mpsmvcommmp go mHm>mH QOfipmoswm Ilma magma

 

.Hm>mH 5m 05 psQOHchmHm 0mm» mpmswm H00 5
.mmcoammp m>HproQ pom mam mmus> \m

.mmzoammm 0:0 20:» whoa m>Hw cmo.\w

 

505V AHNHV A5HV Am50 AHHV AHmmv mHQEMm CH .02
m.:w m.m5 0.0m H.00 5.m5 0.35 xpoo\©mmH
$H.Hm $m.Hm *0.HH $0.0m $0.0H 0.5m couHHoprHOH
m.m 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.H COIHHOH
:.H5 :.:5 m.H: 2.00 m.:m 0.00 Ixmoo\0HpmmHQ

\@ xhoo m>m£ mHSmOHo

 

mcomemasoo mLSmOHo

 

 

AH50 AmmHv A5H0 A050 AHHV A0000 mHasmm :H .02
.pwpmH bhbe bhbe 0.00H 0.00H 0.00H
$0.5 $m.0H $m.mm $m.mH $w.mw m.oH mem\mmEHp mIH
$0.0H $0.0H $0.5H $5.00 $0.0 0.0H apnoe\mer H
$m.wm $m.mm $w.HH $0.mm $m.5m 0.0m npcoe\mmEHp mIm
$0.0m $0.0m $m.HH $0.5m $H.0 0.5m xmmz\mmsH0 NIH
$m.mH $w.m $m.m $H.w $0.0 w.0H xmm3\mmEHp mum
.QEchoo mo mocmsvmhm
AH50 ANNHV A5H0 A050 AHHV A0000 mHQEmm 0H .oz
,5 :.H m.m m.m 0.0 m.wH H.: mmapo
Q0 0.0 m.mH m.m w.0H H.m w.0H mvwsw mafia
w.mm m.0m 2.0m m.:m H.m H.5m mOHHQ
m.HH 5.m m.m H.@ 0.0 m.5 psmEmepmm>Um
m.mm H.m5 0.0m m.m0 m.m: H.m0 mm>HpmHmh\m0:me5
$5.0 *m.mm $5.0H *m.m *H.m N.MH Xhmao hOSUHH
0.0: H.m: 2.0m m.mm m.5m 0.H: mam: 0cmhn
m.m: a.mz m.mm H.mm m.mH 5.0m Hman
I IIIIIII ImmocmSHmcH
\Q unmopmm \0
0cozmp mmeHoo Hoozom Hoosom gch Hoonom Qan mHmew COHpQESmcoo
0:0 mmeHoo mEom HmOchomB UmpmHQEoo mEom Hmpoe 0cm mmmzohsm
UmpwHQEoo

 

 

Umscflpcoo IIMH mHDmE

 

 

86

.mmpoow so no: .mmmmucmopma so meOHMHQmHm mmmsvm Haw \m
.HHm pm paupHOQEH no: "0 0mm pcmupomEH mHoEmppxo um .0m>Hmomh
OHpmempowLmao £00m mchoa mo amass: mwmpm>m map so 0mmmn mp0 Qm>Hw mmmoom mne I

\m

 

msz map @5090 macaw
pcwpsoo oHHOHmo
pcmucoo H0500H<
mepon map CH pcsoe<
:sz 09H: m>pmm op pmnz
mama Uthm
AUQmHQ .m> prmem>v
mcHz mo maze
magpwpmqemp wcH>mmm
moHpm
AHOHoov mafia mo maze
Apmmzm .m> 5900
mcHz mo maze

:rmmm mmmmr—lr—‘Ir-I
NMNNr—In—II—i

:rmmm MNNNNr—Ir‘!

(\I\OOLI\O\M\O
I—IO\O\[\(\JM-:T
O\C>O\O\LC\\Or—i
r-‘IOCD: mmoo
HO\C\\O (‘03:?

mmmm :r-II'NNMNN

\n

O
O
O
O
O

MKOMO
HMNO
MNNN
r—ILflm‘N
t—IJNI—I

\OQDLflt—I -:TC\JL('\C\IO\-:‘:f
:rmmm (\JmmNNr—lI—l
:rmmm MNNNNt—it—l

(IDLOINCID

\m mmpoom

 

H5nu mmHMd 5Huc :5us HHus 5mmnc mOHpmempomLmso Hmnmq
ccozmp mmmHHoo Hoozom Hoonom anQ Hoonom ann whoom
0:0 mmeHoo mEom HmochomB UmpmHQEoo mEom wwwpm>m

0mpmHQEoo H0009

 

 

.mmmoom
Umemez mwmpm>m CH mOHpmHprowLmso Hman an wpcmucoammp 5o mHm>mH COHpmosom Ile mHnt

87

$050
H.5H
0.0

AMHHV
5.5H
H.5

AmHHV
0.5m
2.0H

AOHHV

$:.mm
$0.0

AzHHV
0.5m
H.0

A5HHO
0.0m
0.0

\m n:mo:mm

Aommv mHQEOm :H .02
2.0m n:0n:ooeH mHmsmmnxm
2.0 HHO n0 n:0n:0QSH no:
A0:0Ho .m> H0anp0>v

0:H3 mo mama

Ammmv mHQEOm :H .02

0.mm n:0n:ooEH mHmEmpnxm

m.HH HHO n0 n:0n:ooEH no:
0::n0amo50n w:H>:mm

A0mmv 0HQE0m :H .02

0.2m n:0n:ooEH 0H080hnxw

m.5 HH0 n0 n:0n:o:EH no:
00H:m

Ammmv mHQe0m :H .02

5.0m n:0n:ooEH szEmmnxm

5.0 HHO n0 n:0n:ooEH no:
ALOHooV 0:H3 :0 0:59

A00m0 0HQE0m :H .02
0.50 n:0n:ogEH mHmsmpnxm
:.m HHO n0 n:0n:ooEH no:
Anmmzm .m> 0:00

m:H3 no maze

 

0:000:
0:0 mmmHHoo
00n0HQEoo

mmmHHoo

mEom

Hoonom 00H: Hoogom gmHg

H00H::ome 00n0HQEoo

0HQE0m mOHanpmno0p0:o H000:
H0noB

 

 

:.HH0 n0 n:0n:ooEH no:: 0:0 =n:0n:ooEH mHmsmmnxmz

mo w:Hn0: n:mo:oq :H mOHan:mno0:0:0 Hmo0H mo mn:m0:oommm mo mHm>mH :OHn0os0mllmH mHo0B

.H0>0H 00 n0 n:00HmH:me 0:0:00 H:0
.w0m:oom0: 0>Hnflmoa mom 0:0 003H0> #

 

 

.00no: 0:0 n:0n:o:EH 0H0E0hnx0 um 0:0 HHO n0 n:0n:omefi no: no 0H:o Mm

A050 AHHHV AOH0 A050 AHHV A0000 mHasmm 2H .02

5.0 0.: 0.0 0.0 m.5m m.m pamppoaeH 0H0E000$0

0.0m H.mm 0.m: m.0: H.m 0.0m HHO n0 n:0n:o:EH no:
0:H3 0:n nson0 maonm

A050 AHHHV AOH0 A050 AHHV A0000 oHaemm 0H .02

H.5 H.0 m.0 H.mH m.5m 0.0 pamppoaeH $Hmemmn$0

H.5: 0.00 0.00 0.00 m.5m m.m: HH0 00 pcmppoaeH 00:
n:0n:oo 0H:0H00

A050 AmHHV AOH0 A050 AHHV A0000 0H020m 2H .02

0.0 5.mH 0.0H 0.0m 0.0m m.wH n:0n:ooEH 0H0E0hnx0

0.Hm 0.0m m.5m 0.0m 0.0H 0.00 HH0 00 pcmupomaH no:
n:0n:oo H0£00H<

A050 AmHHV A5H0 AH50 AHHV A0000 0H080m 0H .02

m.0H 0.00 0.HH 0.0m m.5m 0.00 ncmppogsH 0Hmempp$0

0.0m 5.mH m.mm m.0H m.5m m.0H HHO 00 nsmpmoaeH 002
0H0000 0:0 2H 000050

MW A050 AHHHV AmHv A050 AHHV A0000 0H020m 0H .02

0.00 H.Hm 5.0 H.5m H.0 0.0H usmppoaeH 5H05000$0

0.0 m.mH 5.0 5.0H 0.0 :.HH HHO n0 n:0nLOQEH no:
:nHz 0:H3 0>:0m on n0:3

A000 A5HH0 A5H0 A050 AHHV A0000 mHaemm 0H .02

0.5 H.mm 0.00 0.50 0.0: 5.Hm pamppogeH $Hmsmppxm

H.0H H.HH 0.HH 5.0 0.0 H.0H HH0 00 pcmnmomeH no:
050: 0:0:m

\m n:00:0m
0:om0n 0w0HHoo Hoo:om Hoo:om :wH: Hoo:om :wH: 0HQE00 mOHnmflm0no0:0:0 H000:
0:0 0w0HHoo 0Eom H00H::00B 00n0HQEoo 080m H0noe
00n0HQEOD

 

 

omsszcoo -ImH 0H009

 

89

Table 16—— Sex of the respondents by purchase, consumption
patterns and closure comparisons.

 

Purchase and

 

consumption Total sample Male Female
Percent 9/

Purpose for purchase a/
ordinary use 55.3 62.1* 50.8*
guest/party 68.3 69.8 67.2
special occasion 51.5 45.7 55.“
cooking 17.7 1U.7 19.8
gift 26.3 23.3 28.2
other A.“ 3.“ 5.1
No. in sample (293) (116) (177)

Size of container a/
750 ml “7.4 56.9* Ul.2*
1 liter 52.2 47.4 55.4
1.5 liter 10.9 12.1 10.2
0.5 gallon 20.8 15.5 24.3
1 gallon 8.5 9.5 7.9
other 2.0 2.6 1.7
No. in sample (293) (116) (177)

 

Closure comparisons

 

Closure properties a/
keeps mouth clean

plastic/cork
roll-on
foil/roll—on
lead/cork

No. in sample

can tell if opened

plastic/cork
roll-on
foil/roll-on
lead/cork

No. in sample

easy to open
plastic/cork
roll-on
foil/roll—on
lead/cork
No. in sample

easy to reclose
plastic/cork
roll-on
foil/roll-on

lead/cork
No. in sample

65.9
31 9
60. 7
52. 2
(270)

62.7

65.7
63.1
(271)

13.1
89.7
30.5
12.u

(271)

n»4¢:ano
-<an40u»
\40~JHCh

58.7
37.5
53.8
M6. 2
(10M)

70.5
M7.6

70.5
6u.8

(105)

12.6
88.3
32.u

6. 3*

(105)

20.8
83.0
48.1

(136)

70.5
28.3
65.1
56.0
(166)

57.8
53.6
62.7
62.0
(166)

13.5
90.6
29. 2
16. u*
(166)

25.3
85.6

37.6
18.?
(170

Table 16—— Continued

90

 

 

 

Closure
comparisons. Total sample Male Female
Percent b/
Closure properties (cont'd )
higher quality
plastic/cork “1.2 “3.3 39.7
roll-on 6.9 8.7 5.8
foil/roll-on 52.3 ““.2* 57.7*
lead/cork 52.1 5“.8 50.3
No. in sample (260) (10“) (156)
keeps flavor better
plastic/cork 53 3 50.0 55.“
roll-on 18.5 17.6* 19.1*
foil/roll-on 38.2 31.“ “2.7
lead/cork 59.1 62.7 56.7
No. in sample (259) (102 (157
Purposefkm’ purchase a/
gift
plastic/cork “0.3 “3.6 38.1
roll-on 7.6 10.9 5.“
foil/roll—on 5“.3 “7.3 58.9
lead/cork 52.9 58.2 “9.“
No. in sample (278) (110) (168)
ordinary use
plastic/cork 37.7 “1.1 35.5
roll-on 39.1 33.9 “2.“
foil/roll-on “2.3 50.0* 37.2*
lead/Cork “0.8 “1.1 “0.7
No. in sample (28“) (112) (172)
party/spec. occ.
plastic/cork “3.1 “5.“ “1.7
roll-on 15.9 l“.8 16.7
foil/roll—on 50.g “5.“ 53.8
lead/cork 53. 1.

Cork No. in sample (276) ?108) (£38)
easy to open 35.9 “2 7 31.“
hard to open 6“.1 57.3 68.6

100.0 100 0 l00.0
No. in sample (278) (10 ) 170)
keeps flavor better 92.9 91.9 93.6
does not keep flavor 7.1 8.1 6.“
100.0 l00.0 100.0
No. in sample (282) (111) (171)
easy to reclose “0.6 “1.7 “0.0
hard to reclose 59.“ 58.3 60 0
100 0 100 O 100 0

No. in sample (278) (108) (176)

Table 16-— Continued

 

 

 

Closure
comparisons Total sample Male Female
Cork W. 2/
prefer 30.0 37.9* 2“.7*
not prefer 15.5 8.7* 20.1*
not care 5“.5 53.“* 55.2*
100.0 100.0 100.0
No. in sample (290) (116) (17“)
Screw cap
easy to open 95.0 99.1 96.0
hard to open 5.0 0.9 “.0
100.0 100.0 100.0
No. in sample (290) (116) (17“)
keeps flavor “6.“ 35.7* 52.7*
does not keep 53.6 6“.3* “7.3*
100.0 100.0 100.0
No. in sample (290) (116) (17“)
easy to reclose 9“.“ 9“.6 97.6
hard to reclose 5.6 5.“ 2.“
100.0 100.0 100.0
No. in sample (290) (116) (17“)

 

g/
_b_/

* Chi square significant at 5% level.

Can give more than one response.

Values are for positive responses.

92

.m0noom :o no: .m0w0n:0o:0a :o n:00HnH:mHm 0:0500 H:0 I

\:

.HHO n0 n:0n:omEH no: no 0:0 n:0n:omeH 5H0E0nn$0 um a00>H0o0:
0Hann0no0n0:0 :000 mn:Hom no :0985: 000n0>0 0:n :o 0000: 0:0 :0>Hw m0noom 0:9 I

 

 

\0
m.m m.H :.H 0:Hz 0:n nson0 muonm
:.m 0.0 :.H Pflmpfloo OHEOHGO
I :.m I H.m m.m n:0n:oo Ho:OOH<
\0 0.0 \0 0.0 0.0 0Hpnon 0:» 00 003650
m.m 5.m m.m :nHz 0:H3 0>:00 on n0:3
0.m 5.0 m.m 0E0: 0:0:m
H.m H.m H.m A0:0Hn .m> .:0>V 0:H3 mo 0009
m.m m.m H.m 0::n0n0QEOn w:H>:0m
I m.m I m.m m.m 00H:m
\n m.m \p m.m :.m A:0Hoov 0:03 no 0009
m.: 0.: H.: An00zm .m> 0:00 0:H3 no 0909
\m 00:000
55H": 0HHu: mom": mOHan00no0n0:0 H0004
0HOE0m 0H0: 0HmE0m

0m0:0>0 H0no9

.m0noom 00n:wH03 0m0:0>0 :H mOHann0no0n0:0 HOQOH 5: mn:00:oam0: 0:n no $0mII5H 0Hn09

93

Table 18-—Sex of the respondent by label characteristics in
percent rating of "extremely important" and "not important
at all." a/

 

 

Label

characteristics Total sample Male Female
Percent 9/

Type (dry vs. sweet)

not important at all 2.5 1.8 2. 9

extremely important 56. 7 “8.7 62.0

No. in sample (28“) (113) (171)
Type (color)

not important at all 7.1 “.“* 8.9*

extremely important 30. 5 22.1* 36.1*

No. in sample (282) (113) (169)
Price

not important at all 7.0 5.3 8.1

extremely important 23.9 23.0 2“.“

No. in sample (285) (113) (172)
Serving temperature

not important at all 12.“ 15. 2 10.6

extremely important 31.9 28. 6 3“.1

No. in sample (282) (112) (170)
Type (var. vs. blend)

not important at all 6.8 “.“ 8.“

extremely important 20.1 18.6 21.1

No. in sample (279) (113) (166)
Brand name

not important at all l0.2 l3. 3 8. 2

extremely important 21.5 15. 0 25. 7

-No. in sample (28“) (113) (171)
What to serve wine with

not important at all 11. 8 1“.“* 10.1*

extremely important 20. 8 13.5* 25.5*

No. in sample (279) (111) (168)
Amount in the bottle

not important at all 17.7 23.“* 1“.0*

extremely important 22.7 15.3* 27.5*

No. in sample (282) (111) (171)
Alcohol content

not important at all 25. “ 31.0 21.6

extremely important 18. 0 17. 7 18.1

No. in sample (28“) (113) (171)
Caloric content

not important at all “3.1 58. 0* 33.3*

extremely important 9.5 3. 6* 13.5*

No. in sample (283) (112) (171)

9“
Table l8-—Continued

 

 

 

Label
characteristics Total sample Male Female
Percent b/
Story about the wine
not important at all 3“.8 38.9 32.0
extremely important 5.3 2.7 7.1
No. in sample (282) (113) (169)

 

i/ Only 0: not important at all and 5= extremely

important are noted.
9/ Values are for positive responses.

Chi square significant at 5% level.

95

Table 19-- College Educated Frequent Consumers and all other
respondents by purchase, consumption patterns and closure
comparisons.

 

 

 

College
Purchase and educated frequent A11
consumption Total sample consumers others
Intended use a/ 3233223 9/
ordinary use 55.9 80.8* “7.0*
guests/party 67.8 70.5 66.8
special occasion 51.9 56.“ 50.2
cooking 17.6 35.9* 11.1*
gift 26.“ 32.1 2“.“
other “.1 2.6 “.6
No. in sample (295) (78) (217)
Place of purchase a/
supermarket 71.2 78.2 68.7
liquor store 65.1 66.7 6“.5
drug store 3.1 5.1 2.3
convenience store 15.3 26.9* 11.1*
other 8.5 7.7 8.8
No. in sample (295) (78) (217)
Size of container a/
750 ml “7.8 “8.7 “7.5
1 liter 52.2 “2.3 55.8
1.5 liter 11.2 15.“ 9.7
0.5 gallon 21.0 32.1* 17.1*
1 gallon 8.8 20.5* “.6*
other 2.0 2.6 1.8
No. in sample (295) (78) (217)
Influences a/
label 39.7 50.0* 35.9*
brand name “1.0 50.0 37.8
liquor clerk 13.2 19.2 11.1
friends/relatives 65.1 62.8 65.9
advertisement 7.5 9.0 6.9
price 27.1 35.9 2“.0
wine guide 10.8 16.7 8.8
other “.1 2.6 “.6
No. in sample (295) (78) (217)
Origin of wine g/
import “0.6 “9.“ 37.5
Ohio 1.“ 2.6 0.9
Michigan 3“.8 “5.5* 31.0*
California 61.8 75.3* 56.9*
New York 10.2 16.9* 7.9*
pay no attention 17.1 10.“ 19.
other 0.3 0.0 0.9
No. in sample (293) (77 (216

96

Table 19—- Continued

 

 

 

College
Purchase and educated frequent A11
consumption Total sample consumers others
PErcent 27
Type of wine
table 7“.8 88.7* 70.0*
sparkling l“.6 7.0* 17.2*
dessert 7.7 2.8* 9 “*
do not know type 2.9 1.5* 3.“*
100.0 100.0 100 0
No. in sample (27“) (71) (203)
Table wine 3/
white—dry 27.“ 39.“* 22.0*
white semi-dry 38.3 “9.3* 33.3*
red/semi-sweet “0.9 33.8 ““.0
rose 3“.8 31.0 36.5
not sure 3.0 0.0 “.“
other 0.9 l.“ 0.6
No. in sample (230) (71) (159)

 

Closure comparisons

 

Closure properties a/
keeps mouth clean
plastic/cork
roll—on
foil/roll-on
lead/cork
No. in sample

can tell if opened
plastic/cork
roll-on
foil/roll-on
lead/cork
No. in sample

easy to open
plastic/cork
roll-on
foil/roll—on
lead/cork
No. in sample

easy to reclose
plastic/cork
roll-on
foil/roll-on
lead/cork
No. in sample

66.1
32.5
60.9
52.“
(271)

62.5
51.8
65.“
63.2
(272)

13.8
89.8
30.7
13.1
(283)

23.1
85.6
“1.9
18.“
(277)

21.3

18.7
(75

65.2
31-3
59-2
52.2

(201)

58.2*
51.2
63.7

(201)

13.9
90.0
30.6
12.9

(209

NHL/000m
0(1)th
va-J-QCI)

Table 19-- Continued

97

 

 

 

College
Closure educated frequent All
Comparisons Total sample consumers others
Percent b/
Closure properties (cont'd ) -
higher quality
plastic/cork “l.“ “7.8 39.3
roll-on 6.8 7.5 6.6
foil/roll—on 52.1 “3.3 55.1
lead/cork 52.9 55.2 52.0
No. in sample (263) (67) (196)
keeps flavor better
plastic/cork 53.5 59.7 51.3
roll-on 18. 8 19.“ 18.7
foil/roll—on 38.1 3“.3 39.“
lead/cork 59. 6 55.2 61.1
No. in sample (260) (67) (193)
Purpose for purchase a/
gift
plastic/cork “0.“ 52.8* 36.1*
roll—on 7.5 6.9 7.7
foil/roll-on 53.9 “5.8 56.7
lead/cork 53.2 ““.“ 56.3
No. in sample (280) (72) (280)
ordinary use
plastic/cork 37.8 “0.8 36.7
roll—on 39.2 “3.“ 37. 6
foil/roll-on “2.0 55.3* 37. 1*
lead/cork “0.9 36.8 “2.“
No. in sample (286) (76) (210)
party/special occ.
plastic/cork “3.0 60.3* 36. 8*
roll-on 15.9 16.“ 15.7
foil/roll-on “9.8 50.7 “9. 5
lead/cork 5“.2 5“.8 53. 9
No. in sample (277) (73) (20“)
Closure have cork a/
plastic/cork 69.8 83.3* 6“.8*
roll—on 1.0 1.3 0.9
foil/roll-on 27.5 23.1 29.1
lead/cork 7“.6 88.5* 69. 5*
No. in sample (291) (78) (213)

 

a/

— Can give more than one response.

b/
c/

Values are for positive responses.

- Can check two types of table wines most often

consumed.

Chi square significant at 5% level.

98

.00noom :o no: am0m0n:0on0a :0 50 n0 n:0onnfl:wfim 0:0:00 H:o I

\n

.HH0 n0 n0:n:oaefl no:n0 0:0 n:0n:OQEH 0H0E0nnx0um .00>fi0o0:
ofinmfln0no0n0:o :000 mn:Hom go :0055: 0m0:0>0 0:n :0 00000 0:0 :0>Hm 00:000 0:9 I

 

 

\0

:.H m.H :.H 0:H3 0:n nzon0 0nonm
m.H m.H :.H n:0n:oo 0H00H00
m.m 0.m m.m n:0n:oo Ho:00H¢

I 0.0 I m.m 0.0 opron 000 on poooe<
\o 0.0 \o 5.0 0.0 0002 000: o>0mw on 0003
:.m m.m m.m 0:0: 0:0nm
0.m H.m H.m A0:0Hn .m> .:0>v 0:H3 mo 0009
H.m H.m H.m 0:5n0n0080n w:H>:0m
m.m H.m m.m 00H:m
:.m 0.m :.m A:0Hoov 0:H3 no 0009
H.: m.: m.: An0030 .m> 0:00 0:H3 no 0009

\m 000000
5H0": 05": mmMM: moanma:0no0:0:0 H0904
0:0:no HH< 0:0ESm:oo n:0:00:0 0HQE00

00n0os00 0m0HHo0 000:000 Hmw©9

 

.m0noo0 00n:wH03 0w0n0>0
:H mofiann0no0n0:0 H000H 0n 0:0:no HHO 0:0 0:0ESm:o0 n:0500:m 00n0os0m 0m0HHoo IIom 0Hn09

99

Table 21-- College Educated Frequent Consumers by label
characteristics in percent rating of "extremely important"
and "not important at all." g/

 

 

 

College
Label Total educated frequent A11
characteristics sample consumers others
Percent 2/

Type (dry vs. sweet)

not important at all 2.“ 1.3 2.9

extremely important 57.0 62.3 55.0

No. in sample (286) (77) (209)
Type (color)

not important at all 6. 7 3.9 7.8

extremely important 30. 7 35.1 5. 8

No. in sample (283) (77) (206)
Price

not important at all 7.3 6.6 7.6

extremely important 2“. 5 18. 26. 7

No. in sample (286) (76) (210)
Serving temperature

not important at all 11.9 12. O 11.9

extremely important 32. 6 26.7 3“. 8

No. in sample (285) (75) (210)
Type (var. vs. blend)

not important at all 6.“ “.0 7.3

extremely important 20. “ 18.7 21. 0

No. in sample (280) (75) (205)
Brand name

not important at;a11 10.1 1“. 5 8. 6

extremely important 21.7 1“. 5 25 3

No. in sample (286) (76) (210)
What to serve wine with

not important at all 11. “ 13.2* 10.8*

extremely important 20. 7 13.2* 23.5*

No. in sample (280) (76) (20“)
Amount in the bottle

not important at all 18.3 22.“ 16.8

extremely important 23.2 17.1 25.5

No. in sample (28“) (76) (208)
Alcohol content

not important at all 25.6 28.0 2“.8

extremely important 18. 2 12.0 20.5

No. in sample (285) (75) (210)
Caloric content

not important at all “3.3 ““.0 “3.1

extremely important 9.5 6.7 10.5

No. in sample (28“) (75) (209)

100

Table 21—-Continued

 

 

 

0611ege
Label Total educated frequent All
characteristics sample consumers others
Percent b/
Story about the wine
not important at all 3“.6 25.0 38.2
extremely important 5.3 3.9 5.8
No. in sample (283) (76) (207)

 

é/ Only 0= not important at all and 5= extremely
important are noted.

9/ Values are for positive responses.

Chi square significant at 5% level.

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

10.

11.

l2.

l3.

1“.

15.

16.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

"Americans are Now Spending About $1 Billion Annually
for Wine," Beverage World 95(December 1976): 13ml“.

 

Braganini, David. St. Julian Wine 00. Paw Paw, Mi. 1981

"Closures for Bottles, Cans, Jars," Modern Packaging
Encyclopedia “8(December 1975): 91-9“.

 

 

Coles, Jessie V. Standards and Labels for Consumers'
Goods. New York: The Ronald Press 00., 19“9.

 

Fowell, Raymond J. and J.L. Baritelle. The U.S. Wine
Market. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, 1978.

 

Glossary of Packaging Terms. New York: The Packaging
Institute. 1979-“1.

 

Guss, Leonard M. Packaging is Marketing. New York:
American Management Ass., 1979—103.

 

Hanlon, Joseph. Handbook of Package Engineering.
McGraw Hill, 1971.

 

Howell, G.S. M.S.U., Dept. of Hort. East Lansing, Mi.
Interview, 1980.

The Impact American Wine Market Review and Forecast. 1979

 

Karteu, Al. "Liquor Industry Responds to 'Woman Power',"
Packaging Engineering 18(August 1973): 16d-16e.

 

Parten, Mildred. Surveys, Polls and Samples: Practical
Procedures. New York: Harper Brothers. 1950-71.

 

 

Pride, Wm. M. and 0.C. Ferell. Marketing Basic Concepts
and Decisions. Houghton Miffin Co., 1980-92.

 

 

Rubin, Hank. "An Alternative to Bark Corks," Wines and
Vines 61(Ju1y 1980): 28—29.

 

"Alternative to the Cork,": Vintago

 

Magazine .(July 1980): “6—51.

"SAA Proudly Announces the New Jet Travel Wine Pack,"
Flying Spring Book (October 1977): 30-31.

 

101

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

102

State of Michigan. Dept. of Commerce. Liquor
Control Commission Manuf. and Wholesaler Section.
Summary of Wine Shipment into Michigan, 1975—1979.

U.S. Dept. of Commerce. Bureau of the Census, Current
Population Reports, Consumer Income Series 111 (1980):
97.

 

U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Census of
the Population (1980): “—5.

 

 

Warner, James Jr. Warner Vineyards. Paw Paw, Mi., 1981.

Zurn, F. "Bottle Closures in Testing Procedure,"
German Viniculture (October 1977): 30.

 

Wozniak, Robert. Bronte Champagne and Wines Co.,
Hartfort, Mi. 1981.

MICHIGRN STQTE UN

I IIIIII IIII

31293104

IV. LIBRQRIES
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
151505